Chitty v. State
174 S.W.3d 51, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1559, 2005 WL 2739250
Opinion
ORDER
Movant, David Paul Chitty, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion after an evidentiary hearing. The motion court’s findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Chitty v. State, 174 S.W.3d 51, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1559, 2005 WL 2739250 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).
174 S.W.3d 51 (Chitty v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Moore v. State
174 S.W.3d 51 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2005)