Patel v. State ( 2005 )


Menu:
  • ORDER

    PER CURIAM.

    Manu Patel (“movant”) appeals from 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 find no *109error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

    The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Document Info

Docket Number: No. ED 84479

Judges: Ahrens, Baker, Norton

Filed Date: 2/22/2005

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/14/2024