Wright v. State

427 S.W.3d 888, 2014 WL 1379681, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 384
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Wright v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 1224
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 8, 2014·No. No. ED 99362·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Stanley J. Wright appeals from the motion court’s “Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Judgment” denying his Rule 24.035, “Amended Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Judgment and Sentence,” alleging ineffective assistance of plea counsel. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal, and find the claim of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Wright v. State, 427 S.W.3d 888, 2014 WL 1379681, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 384 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014).

427 S.W.3d 888 (Wright v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.