Lee v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Lee v. State

962 S.W.2d 411, 1998 Mo. App. LEXIS 143, 1998 WL 25469

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Lee v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1995 Mo. App. LEXIS 1771 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided January 27, 1998·No. No. 71831·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Charles Lee ( “movant”), appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief after his plea of guilty to third offense stealing, RSMo section 570.040 (1994).

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find that the judgment is not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). As an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose, we affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). A memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision is attached solely for the use of the parties involved.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Charles Lee ( “movant”), appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief after his plea of guilty to third offense stealing, RSMo section 570.040 (1994).

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find that the judgment is not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). As an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose, we affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). A memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision is attached solely for the use of the parties involved.

Lee v. State, 962 S.W.2d 411, 1998 Mo. App. LEXIS 143, 1998 WL 25469 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

962 S.W.2d 411 (Lee v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.