Legal Opinion

Garth v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided October 22, 2013No. ED 99533PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, Judge.

Paul Garth (“Movant”) appeals from the judgment of the motion court that denied his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 29.15 without an evidentiary hearing. Finding no error, we affirm.

Movant was charged by indictment with first-degree domestic assault in violation of Section 565.072 RSMo (Cum.Supp.2006) for events that happened on December 18, 2009. The facts in that case are as follows. In December 2009, Movant was living with Victim as her boyfriend. State v. Garth, 352 S.W.3d 644, 647 (Mo.App.2011). Victim broke off their relationship after…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Zink v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 2009
  2. Anderson v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 2006
  3. United States v. John Paul WilsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
  4. Tisius v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 2006
  5. Kane v. Garcia EspitiaSupreme Court of the United States · 2005

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Henderson v. CommonwealthMissouri Court of Appeals · 2018
  2. Beasley v. BucknerDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 2020
  3. Tommy J. Davis v. State of MissouriMissouri Court of Appeals · 2021

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API