Kent v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Kent v. State

801 S.W.2d 483, 1990 Mo. App. LEXIS 1765, 1990 WL 198192

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 11, 1990·No. No. 58072·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. Mov-ant’s claims of error fail because the record conclusively refutes them. Movant is not entitled to relief. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are supported by the record, hence, not clearly erroneous. Judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. Mov-ant’s claims of error fail because the record conclusively refutes them. Movant is not entitled to relief. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are supported by the record, hence, not clearly erroneous. Judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Kent v. State, 801 S.W.2d 483, 1990 Mo. App. LEXIS 1765, 1990 WL 198192 (Mo. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

801 S.W.2d 483 (Kent v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.