Larkins v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Larkins v. State

838 S.W.2d 15, 1992 Mo. App. LEXIS 1234, 1992 WL 166106

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided July 21, 1992·No. No. 61001·Published

Opinion

[16]*16ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals from the dismissal of his Rule 24.035 motion after pleading guilty to distribution of a controlled substance near a school. 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 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

[16]*16ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals from the dismissal of his Rule 24.035 motion after pleading guilty to distribution of a controlled substance near a school. 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 forth the reasons for our order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Larkins v. State, 838 S.W.2d 15, 1992 Mo. App. LEXIS 1234, 1992 WL 166106 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

838 S.W.2d 15 (Larkins v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.