Hood v. State
Hood v. State
34 S.W.3d 870; 2001 Mo. App. LEXIS 32; 2001 WL 15713
(South Western Reporter, Third Series)
Hood v. State
Opinion of the Court
ORDER
Stuart Hood (“Movant”) appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29 .15 motion for post-conviction relief. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court’s determination is not clearly erroneous. 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).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.