Ott Law Firm Agent-Safe Plain Text
Official source remains authoritative.

Case: John D. Sexton, Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District
Decision Date: Unknown
Outcome: affirmed
Practice Area: criminal-law
Canonical URL: https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/john-d-sexton-appellant-v-state-of-missouri-respondent-18520
Official Source URL: https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=18520
Related Practice Areas:
- Criminal Law: https://ott.law/practice-areas/criminal-law?ott_archive=missouri-courts&ott_archive_practice_area=criminal-law&ott_archive_query=John+D.+Sexton%2C+Appellant%2C+v.+State+of+Missouri%2C+Respondent.&ott_archive_link_source=tag&ott_archive_link_score=26&ott_archive_link_evidence=tag%3A+criminal-law%3B+text%3A+state+of+missouri&ott_archive_location=opinion_plain_text_practice_area (slug: criminal-law; source: tag; score: 26; evidence: tag: criminal-law, text: state of missouri, text: conviction)

---
## Opinion

This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.
Opinion
Missouri Court of Appeals Western District
Case Style:  John D. Sexton, Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.
Case Number:  54229
Handdown Date:  10/28/1997
Appeal From:  Circuit Court of Jackson County, Hon. William W. Ely
Counsel for Appellant:  Susan L. Hogan
Counsel for Respondent:  Breck K. Burgess
Opinion Summary: 
None
Citation: 
Opinion Author:  PER CURIAM
Opinion Vote:  AFFIRMED.   Smart, P.J., Lowenstein and Stith, JJ., concur.
Opinion:
ORDER
John D. Sexton appeals the motion court's denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an 
evidentiary hearing.  We find that Mr. Sexton's motion was untimely filed and, therefore, affirm the motion court's ruling. 
Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, we affirm by this summary order and have furnished the 
parties with a memorandum setting forth our reasoning.  Judgment affirmed.  Rule 84.16(b).
Separate Opinion:
None
This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.