Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

128 S.W.3d 550

Clark v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided January 13, 2004

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 2004-01-13

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently November 2017

1 federal appellate · 10 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2004-01-13

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2Morris Clark (“Movant”) appeals the denial of his post-conviction Rule 24.035 motion without a hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the motion court did not clearly err. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b)

¶3The parties are in agreement that the judgment contains a clerical error. The trial court found Movant to be a prior drug offender but incorrectly marked the box indicating he was a persistent drug offender. Accordingly, we amend the judgment to find that Movant is a prior drug offender and not a persistent drug offender.

/128/sw3d/550 · .json · Public domain