Ruth v. State
Ruth v. State
202 S.W.3d 638; 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1175; 2006 WL 2128852
(South Western Reporter, Third Series)
Ruth v. State
Opinion
ORDER
Phillip Ruth appeals from a judgment denying his Rule 74.06 motion to re-open post-conviction proceedings. Because Ruth’s motion failed to state a proper claim for relief under Rule 74.06, we affirm the motion court’s judgment.
No precedential purpose would be served by a published opinion, however, we have provided the parties with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision. AFFIRMED. Rule 84.16(b).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.