Carroll v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Carroll v. State

782 S.W.2d 71, 1989 Mo. App. LEXIS 800, 1989 WL 59452

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Carroll v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1991 Mo. App. LEXIS 495 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 6, 1989·No. No. 55290·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion without an evidentiary 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 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 of his Rule 29.15 motion without an evidentiary 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 our order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Carroll v. State, 782 S.W.2d 71, 1989 Mo. App. LEXIS 800, 1989 WL 59452 (Mo. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

782 S.W.2d 71 (Carroll v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.