Dugger v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Dugger v. State

878 S.W.2d 829, 1993 Mo. App. LEXIS 1372, 1993 WL 328546

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided August 31, 1993·No. No. 63871·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Timothy Dugger, appeals from a dismissal of his Rule 24.035 motion as untimely in the Circuit Court of St. Louis Coun[830]*830ty. We affirm. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find the findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous. As we further find an extended opinion would have no prec-edential value, we affirm the motion court’s order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). A memorandum, solely for the use of the parties here involved, has been provided explaining the reasons for our decision.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Timothy Dugger, appeals from a dismissal of his Rule 24.035 motion as untimely in the Circuit Court of St. Louis Coun[830]*830ty. We affirm. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find the findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous. As we further find an extended opinion would have no prec-edential value, we affirm the motion court’s order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). A memorandum, solely for the use of the parties here involved, has been provided explaining the reasons for our decision.

Dugger v. State, 878 S.W.2d 829, 1993 Mo. App. LEXIS 1372, 1993 WL 328546 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

878 S.W.2d 829 (Dugger v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.