WURTZBERGER v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

WURTZBERGER v. State

355 S.W.3d 568, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1712, 2011 WL 6835246

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 27, 2011·No. ED 96119·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Bryan Wurtzberger appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We find that the motion court did not clearly err in denying Wurtzber-ger’s motion for post-conviction relief. We affirm.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Bryan Wurtzberger appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We find that the motion court did not clearly err in denying Wurtzber-ger’s motion for post-conviction relief. We affirm.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).

WURTZBERGER v. State, 355 S.W.3d 568, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1712, 2011 WL 6835246 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

355 S.W.3d 568 (WURTZBERGER v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.