Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

69 S.W.3d 136

Moore v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided February 26, 2002

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 2002-02-26

Relies on State v. Moore

Decided 2002-02-26

¶1ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2Appellant Mark Moore (Movant) appeals the judgment dismissing his second 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief as successive. We previously affirmed Movant’s convictions for first degree murder, attempted first degree robbery, and two counts of armed criminal action, as well as the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion. State v. Moore, 23 S.W.3d 844 (Mo.App. E.D.2000).

¶3We find no clear error in the motion court’s judgment. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

/69/sw3d/136 · .json · Public domain