Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

46 S.W.3d 583

Moore v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided April 17, 2001

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 2001-04-17

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently February 2005

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2001-04-17

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ORDER

PER CURLAM.

¶2Appellant Shawn Moore (“Movant”) appeals the judgment denying, after an evi-dentiary hearing, his Rule 29.15 motion to vacate, set aside, or correct the judgment or sentence. Movant asserts the motion court clearly erred in denying his motion as he was deprived of his constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel.

¶3The findings and conclusions of the motion court are based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties, however, have been furnished with a memorandum, for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order.

¶4We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

/46/sw3d/583 · .json · Public domain