Terry v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Terry v. State

816 S.W.2d 23, 1991 Mo. App. LEXIS 1530, 1991 WL 197527

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Terry v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1989 Mo. App. LEXIS 706 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 8, 1991·No. No. 58997·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals from the denial of his Rule 27.26 motion following an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous, and an extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only setting forth the reasons for our order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals from the denial of his Rule 27.26 motion following an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous, and an extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only setting forth the reasons for our order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Terry v. State, 816 S.W.2d 23, 1991 Mo. App. LEXIS 1530, 1991 WL 197527 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

816 S.W.2d 23 (Terry v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.