Stringfellow v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Stringfellow v. State

867 S.W.2d 597, 1993 Mo. App. LEXIS 1701, 1993 WL 439388

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided November 2, 1993·No. No. 63721·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Mark L. Stringfellow, appeals from the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing. The judgments of conviction sought to be vacated were for murder in the second degree, two counts of armed criminal action, robbery in the first degree and unlawful use of a weapon. Movant was sentenced to concurrent terms of imprisonment of twenty-two years on each of the first four convictions and five years on the unlawful use of a weapon conviction.

The judgment of the motion court is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous; no error of law appears. An opinion would have no precedential value.

The judgment of the motion court is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Mark L. Stringfellow, appeals from the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing. The judgments of conviction sought to be vacated were for murder in the second degree, two counts of armed criminal action, robbery in the first degree and unlawful use of a weapon. Movant was sentenced to concurrent terms of imprisonment of twenty-two years on each of the first four convictions and five years on the unlawful use of a weapon conviction.

The judgment of the motion court is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous; no error of law appears. An opinion would have no precedential value.

The judgment of the motion court is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Stringfellow v. State, 867 S.W.2d 597, 1993 Mo. App. LEXIS 1701, 1993 WL 439388 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

867 S.W.2d 597 (Stringfellow v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.