Foster v. State

791 S.W.2d 955, 1990 Mo. App. LEXIS 1026, 1990 WL 88969
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Foster v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1988 Mo. App. LEXIS 293
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 29, 1990·No. No. 56940·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals from the denial of his motion under former Rule 27.26. He was convicted of capital murder and first degree robbery and sentenced to serve life imprisonment without possibility of parole for fifty years and a consecutive thirty year sentence. The convictions were in 1977.

On appeal movant raises 46 separate contentions of error. The motion court made specific findings of fact and conclusions of law on each of his motion raised contentions. Those findings and conclusions are fully supported by the record. The contentions in many cases are repetitive, in many cases they assert error for things that never happened, and in many cases they deal with matters not cognizable in a post-conviction proceeding. The allegations of ineffectiveness of counsel are either unsupported by the record, involve trial strategy, or are patently non-prejudicial. Twenty-five contentions of error were raised despite protest by movant’s counsel that they were repetitive or groundless. Counsel’s assessment was accurate.

The findings of the court below are not clearly erroneous and no error of law appears. There is no precedential value to an opinion.

Judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

All concur.

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

Foster v. State, 791 S.W.2d 955, 1990 Mo. App. LEXIS 1026, 1990 WL 88969 (Mo. Ct. App. 1990).

791 S.W.2d 955 (Foster v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.