McKenney v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

McKenney v. State

792 S.W.2d 31, 1990 Mo. App. LEXIS 768, 1990 WL 63659

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided May 15, 1990·No. No. 55991·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Jeffrey McKenney, appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.

The findings of fact and conclusions of law of the motion court are not clearly erroneous and an extended opinion would have no precedential purpose. A memorandum, solely for the use of the parties in[32]*32volved, has been provided explaining the reasons for our decision. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Jeffrey McKenney, appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.

The findings of fact and conclusions of law of the motion court are not clearly erroneous and an extended opinion would have no precedential purpose. A memorandum, solely for the use of the parties in[32]*32volved, has been provided explaining the reasons for our decision. Rule 84.16(b).

McKenney v. State, 792 S.W.2d 31, 1990 Mo. App. LEXIS 768, 1990 WL 63659 (Mo. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

792 S.W.2d 31 (McKenney v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.