Russell v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Russell v. State

873 S.W.2d 686, 1994 Mo. App. LEXIS 661, 1994 WL 133374

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 19, 1994·No. No. 65055·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals the denial, without an evi-dentiary hearing, of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. 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 this 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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals the denial, without an evi-dentiary hearing, of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. 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 this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Russell v. State, 873 S.W.2d 686, 1994 Mo. App. LEXIS 661, 1994 WL 133374 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

873 S.W.2d 686 (Russell v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.