Cotton v. State

772 S.W.2d 695, 1989 Mo. App. LEXIS 522, 1989 WL 36649
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 18, 1989·No. No. 55177·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals from the denial of his Rule 27.26 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. No error of law appears, 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

Cotton v. State, 772 S.W.2d 695, 1989 Mo. App. LEXIS 522, 1989 WL 36649 (Mo. Ct. App. 1989).

772 S.W.2d 695 (Cotton v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.