State v. Harry

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Harry

886 S.W.2d 217, 1994 Mo. App. LEXIS 1698

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided November 1, 1994·No. No. 63143·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Charles Hairy, appeals from his conviction for involuntary manslaughter and armed criminal action in St. Louis County Circuit Court, and from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. 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 that are not clearly erroneous. As we further find an extended opinion would have no precedential value, we affirm the circuit court’s judgments pursuant to Rules 84.16(b) and 30.25(b). A memorandum, solely for the use of the parties here involved, has been provided explaining the reasons for our decision.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Charles Hairy, appeals from his conviction for involuntary manslaughter and armed criminal action in St. Louis County Circuit Court, and from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. 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 that are not clearly erroneous. As we further find an extended opinion would have no precedential value, we affirm the circuit court’s judgments pursuant to Rules 84.16(b) and 30.25(b). A memorandum, solely for the use of the parties here involved, has been provided explaining the reasons for our decision.

State v. Harry, 886 S.W.2d 217, 1994 Mo. App. LEXIS 1698 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

886 S.W.2d 217 (State v. Harry) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.