McDonald v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

McDonald v. State

865 S.W.2d 446, 1993 Mo. App. LEXIS 1800

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided November 23, 1993·No. Nos. 62553, 63522·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals his conviction, by a jury, of first degree robbery, § 569.020, RSMo 1986. He was sentenced in accordance with the jury’s punishment verdict to a ten year prison term. He also appeals the dismissal, for untimely filing, of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. We affirm.

We have reviewed the record and find the claims of error are without merit; the judgment of the motion court is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. A written opinion would have no precedential [447]*447value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. Rule 30.25(b); Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals his conviction, by a jury, of first degree robbery, § 569.020, RSMo 1986. He was sentenced in accordance with the jury’s punishment verdict to a ten year prison term. He also appeals the dismissal, for untimely filing, of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. We affirm.

We have reviewed the record and find the claims of error are without merit; the judgment of the motion court is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. A written opinion would have no precedential [447]*447value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. Rule 30.25(b); Rule 84.16(b).

McDonald v. State, 865 S.W.2d 446, 1993 Mo. App. LEXIS 1800 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

865 S.W.2d 446 (McDonald v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.