Wright v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Wright v. State

313 S.W.3d 731, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 874, 2010 WL 2483276

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 22, 2010

DocketWD 70939

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 313 S.W.3d 731 (Wright v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wright v. State, 313 S.W.3d 731, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 874, 2010 WL 2483276 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Sean Wright appeals the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 29.15 motion for postconviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. He sought to vacate his convictions for first-degree statutory sodomy and second-degree statutory sodomy and consecutive sentences of life and seven years imprisonment, respectively. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

The judgment of the motion court is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Sean Wright appeals the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 29.15 motion for postconviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. He sought to vacate his convictions for first-degree statutory sodomy and second-degree statutory sodomy and consecutive sentences of life and seven years imprisonment, respectively. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

The judgment of the motion court is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

313 S.W.3d 731, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 874, 2010 WL 2483276, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wright-v-state-moctapp-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack