Harvey v. State
Harvey v. State
17 S.W.3d 607; 2000 Mo. App. LEXIS 725; 2000 WL 622854
(South Western Reporter, Third Series)
Harvey v. State
Opinion of the Court
Cornell Harvey (“Movant”) appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion to vacate, set aside or correct his judgment and sentence -without an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court’s determination is not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would be of no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.