Hemphill v. State
782 S.W.2d 716, 1989 Mo. App. LEXIS 1633, 1989 WL 139985
Opinion
ORDER
Movant appeals from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous, and an extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only setting [717]*717forth 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
Hemphill v. State, 782 S.W.2d 716, 1989 Mo. App. LEXIS 1633, 1989 WL 139985 (Mo. Ct. App. 1989).
782 S.W.2d 716 (Hemphill v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.