Charron v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Charron v. State

792 S.W.2d 49, 1990 Mo. App. LEXIS 986, 1990 WL 89572

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 26, 1990·No. No. 56149·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Kenneth Charron, appeals the denial of his Rule 27.26 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. The findings of fact and conclusions of law of the motion court are not clearly erroneous and an extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. A memorandum, solely for the information of the parties here involved, has been supplied explaining the reasons for our holding. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Kenneth Charron, appeals the denial of his Rule 27.26 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. The findings of fact and conclusions of law of the motion court are not clearly erroneous and an extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. A memorandum, solely for the information of the parties here involved, has been supplied explaining the reasons for our holding. Rule 84.16(b).

Charron v. State, 792 S.W.2d 49, 1990 Mo. App. LEXIS 986, 1990 WL 89572 (Mo. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

792 S.W.2d 49 (Charron v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.