From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Watson v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR.
Dec 8, 2015
477 S.W.3d 688 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015)

Opinion

No. ED 102295

12-08-2015

Terry Gene Watson, Movant/Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.

Matthew W. Huckeby, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101, for Movant/Appellant. Rachel S. Flaster, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102, for Respondent/Respondent.


Matthew W. Huckeby, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101, for Movant/Appellant.

Rachel S. Flaster, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102, for Respondent/Respondent.

Before Lisa S. Van Amburg, C.J., Sherri B. Sullivan, J., and Kurt S. Odenwald, J.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Terry Gene Watson appeals from the motion court's judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k); Burston v. State, 343 S.W.3d 691, 693 (Mo.App.E.D.2011). 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 Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

All rule references are to Mo. R. Crim. P. 2014, unless otherwise noted.
--------


Summaries of

Watson v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR.
Dec 8, 2015
477 S.W.3d 688 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015)
Case details for

Watson v. State

Case Details

Full title:Terry Gene Watson, Movant/Appellant, v. State of Missouri…

Court:Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR.

Date published: Dec 8, 2015

Citations

477 S.W.3d 688 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015)