Macke v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Macke v. State

887 S.W.2d 781, 1994 Mo. App. LEXIS 1827, 1994 WL 663368

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 29, 1994

DocketNo. 65808

StatusPublished

This text of 887 S.W.2d 781 (Macke v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Macke v. State, 887 S.W.2d 781, 1994 Mo. App. LEXIS 1827, 1994 WL 663368 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Victory Macke, appeals from the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find the judgments of the circuit court are based on findings of fact and conclusions of law that are not clearly erroneous. Appellant was properly charged as a persistent offender for felony driving while intoxicated pursuant to RSMo § 577.023 (1986). The Western District’s decision in State v. Conz, 756 S.W.2d 543 (Mo.App.W.D.1988), controls here. As we further find an extended opinion would have no prec-edential value, we affirm the circuit court’s judgment pursuant to Rules 84.16(b) and 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Victory Macke, appeals from the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find the judgments of the circuit court are based on findings of fact and conclusions of law that are not clearly erroneous. Appellant was properly charged as a persistent offender for felony driving while intoxicated pursuant to RSMo § 577.023 (1986). The Western District’s decision in State v. Conz, 756 S.W.2d 543 (Mo.App.W.D.1988), controls here. As we further find an extended opinion would have no prec-edential value, we affirm the circuit court’s judgment pursuant to Rules 84.16(b) and 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

887 S.W.2d 781, 1994 Mo. App. LEXIS 1827, 1994 WL 663368, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/macke-v-state-moctapp-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack