Burton v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Burton v. State

849 S.W.2d 200, 1993 Mo. App. LEXIS 229, 1993 WL 35722

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Burton v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1991 Mo. App. LEXIS 1668 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 16, 1993·No. No. 61765·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals from the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion following an evidentia-ry hearing. 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 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 from the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion following an evidentia-ry hearing. 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 this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Burton v. State, 849 S.W.2d 200, 1993 Mo. App. LEXIS 229, 1993 WL 35722 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

849 S.W.2d 200 (Burton v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.