Missouri Court of Appeals, 2009

Dotson v. State

Dotson v. State
Missouri Court of Appeals · Decided September 1, 2009 · Norton, Hoff, Mooney
291 S.W.3d 372; 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1217; 2009 WL 2748043 (South Western Reporter, Third Series)

Dotson v. State

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Leann Dotson appeals from the motion court’s Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Judgment (judgment) denying her Rule 24.035 Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct the Judgment or Sentence (PCR Motion) alleging she received ineffective assistance from her plea counsel.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal, and find the claims of error to be without merit. The judgment of the motion court is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. Rule 84.16(b)(2); Rule 24.035(k). No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). The parties have been furnished a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for the order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.