Bates v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Bates v. State

863 S.W.2d 616, 1992 Mo. App. LEXIS 1586, 1992 WL 277254

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 13, 1992·No. No. 61723·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals from the denial without an evidentiary hearing of his Rule 24.035 motion. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous, and 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 our 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 from the denial without an evidentiary hearing of his Rule 24.035 motion. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous, and 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 our order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Bates v. State, 863 S.W.2d 616, 1992 Mo. App. LEXIS 1586, 1992 WL 277254 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

863 S.W.2d 616 (Bates v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.