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

Case: Stanley Moore, Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
Decision Date: Unknown
Outcome: affirmed
Practice Area: other
Canonical URL: https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/stanley-moore-appellant-v-state-of-missouri-respondent-12938
Official Source URL: https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=12938
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=Stanley+Moore%2C+Appellant%2C+v.+State+of+Missouri%2C+Respondent&ott_archive_link_source=text&ott_archive_link_score=4&ott_archive_link_evidence=text%3A+state+of+missouri&ott_archive_location=opinion_plain_text_practice_area (slug: criminal-law; source: text; score: 4; evidence: text: state of missouri)

---
## Opinion

This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.
Opinion
Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District
Case Style:  Stanley Moore, Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent
Case Number:  72248
Handdown Date:  02/10/1998
Appeal From:  Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Hon. Bernhardt C. Drumm, III
Counsel for Appellant:  David Hemingway
Counsel for Respondent:  Meghan J. Stephens
Opinion Summary: 
None
Citation: 
Opinion Author:  Per Curiam
Opinion Vote:  AFFIRMED.  Dowd, Robert G., Jr., P.J., Simon and Hoff, J.J.
Opinion:
ORDER
Stanley Moore, Movant, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary 
hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court's judgment is not 
clearly erroneous.  Rule 24.035(k).  An extended opinion would have no precedential value.  We have, however, prepared 
a memorandum opinion setting forth the reasons for our decision for the use of the parties only.  We affirm the judgment 
pursuant to 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.