Barber v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Barber v. State

892 S.W.2d 766, 1995 Mo. App. LEXIS 22, 1995 WL 6639

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided January 10, 1995·No. No. 65852·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals the denial, without an evi-dentiary hearing, of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals the denial, without an evi-dentiary hearing, of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Barber v. State, 892 S.W.2d 766, 1995 Mo. App. LEXIS 22, 1995 WL 6639 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

892 S.W.2d 766 (Barber v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.