Missouri Court of Appeals, 2012

Woolfolk v. State

Woolfolk v. State
Missouri Court of Appeals · Decided March 20, 2012 · Ahrens, Richter, Gaertner
362 S.W.3d 489; 2012 WL 944612; 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 377 (South Western Reporter, Third Series)

Woolfolk v. State

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Orlando Woolfolk, Sr., appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 1 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, and we conclude the motion court’s denial of post-conviction relief was not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(h), (k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties, for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). Mo. R. Civ. P. (2011).

1

. All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P. (2011), unless otherwise indicated.

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