State v. Nelson

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Nelson

844 S.W.2d 595, 1993 Mo. App. LEXIS 63

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Nelson. Read the opinion of the Court — 1991 Mo. App. LEXIS 1476 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided January 19, 1993·No. Nos. 60040, 61525·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Benny Nelson (Defendant) appeals from his conviction and the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion without an evidentia-ry hearing. We affirm per Rule 84.16(b) and Rule 30.25(b). No error of law appears and Defendant’s post-conviction claim is refuted by the record. An 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.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Benny Nelson (Defendant) appeals from his conviction and the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion without an evidentia-ry hearing. We affirm per Rule 84.16(b) and Rule 30.25(b). No error of law appears and Defendant’s post-conviction claim is refuted by the record. An 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.

State v. Nelson, 844 S.W.2d 595, 1993 Mo. App. LEXIS 63 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

844 S.W.2d 595 (State v. Nelson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.