State v. Davies

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Davies

813 S.W.2d 388, 1991 WL 158535

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided August 20, 1991·No. Nos. 55989, 59277·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. 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 our 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.

Defendant appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. 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 our order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

State v. Davies, 813 S.W.2d 388, 1991 WL 158535 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

813 S.W.2d 388 (State v. Davies) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.