Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

206 S.W.3d 377

Wright v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided November 21, 2006

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 2006-11-21

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently January 2013

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2006-11-21

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2Steven Wright (“movant”) appeals the judgment of the motion court denying his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Missouri Supreme Court Rule 29.15 on the merits after an evidentiary hearing. Movant claims the motion court clearly erred in denying his claims because he was denied effective assistance of counsel.

¶3We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

¶4*378The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

/206/sw3d/377 · .json · Public domain