State v. Stone

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Stone

852 S.W.2d 430, 1993 Mo. App. LEXIS 721

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Stone. Read the opinion of the Court — 1994 Mo. App. LEXIS 100 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided May 18, 1993·No. Nos. 59348, 61703·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

A consolidated appeal. Defendant was convicted as a prior and persistent offender of first degree robbery and armed criminal action. He appeals his convictions and the denial of his 29.15 motion after a hearing based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We affirm per Rules 84.16(b) and 30.25(b). No error of law appears, and the motion court’s findings are not clearly erroneous. An opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

A consolidated appeal. Defendant was convicted as a prior and persistent offender of first degree robbery and armed criminal action. He appeals his convictions and the denial of his 29.15 motion after a hearing based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We affirm per Rules 84.16(b) and 30.25(b). No error of law appears, and the motion court’s findings are not clearly erroneous. An opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only.

State v. Stone, 852 S.W.2d 430, 1993 Mo. App. LEXIS 721 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

852 S.W.2d 430 (State v. Stone) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.