Boclair v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Boclair v. State

889 S.W.2d 65, 1994 Mo. App. LEXIS 1663, 1994 WL 583913

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 25, 1994·No. No. 65382·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Curtis Boelair (“Defendant”) appeals from the denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. We affirm.

We have reviewed the record and find the judgment of the motion court is based on findings that are not clearly erroneous. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no prec-edential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Curtis Boelair (“Defendant”) appeals from the denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. We affirm.

We have reviewed the record and find the judgment of the motion court is based on findings that are not clearly erroneous. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no prec-edential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Boclair v. State, 889 S.W.2d 65, 1994 Mo. App. LEXIS 1663, 1994 WL 583913 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

889 S.W.2d 65 (Boclair v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.