Wright v. State

81 S.W.3d 656, 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 1261, 2002 WL 1275615
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Wright v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2003 Mo. App. LEXIS 1978
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 11, 2002·No. No. ED 80177·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

William Rushing Wright (“movant”) appeals the judgment of the motion court denying his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Missouri Supreme Court Rule 29.15 on the merits without an evi-dentiary hearing. In his motion, movant claims he was denied effective assistance of counsel by the failure of his counsel to assert certain objections at trial.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Wright v. State, 81 S.W.3d 656, 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 1261, 2002 WL 1275615 (Mo. Ct. App. 2002).

81 S.W.3d 656 (Wright v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.