State v. York

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. York

811 S.W.2d 862, 1991 Mo. App. LEXIS 1091

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided July 16, 1991·No. Nos. 57855, 59617·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from his conviction for attempted stealing by deceit and from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. The judgments are based upon findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous and no error of law appears. An opinion would have no prece-dential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and [863]*863reasons for this order pursuant to Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from his conviction for attempted stealing by deceit and from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. The judgments are based upon findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous and no error of law appears. An opinion would have no prece-dential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and [863]*863reasons for this order pursuant to Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).

State v. York, 811 S.W.2d 862, 1991 Mo. App. LEXIS 1091 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

811 S.W.2d 862 (State v. York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.