Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

126 S.W.3d 780

King v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided January 27, 2004

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 2004-01-27

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently December 2005

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2004-01-27

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2Movant, Brady King, appeals from the judgment denying on the merits his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order.

¶3We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

/126/sw3d/780 · .json · Public domain