Voegtlin v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Voegtlin v. State

514 S.W.3d 60, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 192, 2017 WL 1056205

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 21, 2017

DocketNo. ED 104600

StatusPublished

This text of 514 S.W.3d 60 (Voegtlin v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Voegtlin v. State, 514 S.W.3d 60, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 192, 2017 WL 1056205 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Franklin Voegtlin appeals the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We find the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous and affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order 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.

Franklin Voegtlin appeals the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We find the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous and affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

514 S.W.3d 60, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 192, 2017 WL 1056205, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/voegtlin-v-state-moctapp-2017.