Washington v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Washington v. State

720 S.W.2d 9, 1986 Mo. App. LEXIS 4722

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Washington v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1989 Mo. App. LEXIS 541 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 23, 1986·No. No. 51060·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals from a judgment denying his Rule 27.26 motion in which he sought to have set aside his conviction of second degree robbery in violation of § 569.030 RSMo.1978.

[10]*10After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court issued findings of fact and conclusions of law in which it denied the motion. The judgment was not clearly erroneous. Rule 27.26(j).

The judgment is affirmed in compliance with 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 a judgment denying his Rule 27.26 motion in which he sought to have set aside his conviction of second degree robbery in violation of § 569.030 RSMo.1978.

[10]*10After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court issued findings of fact and conclusions of law in which it denied the motion. The judgment was not clearly erroneous. Rule 27.26(j).

The judgment is affirmed in compliance with Rule 84.16(b).

Washington v. State, 720 S.W.2d 9, 1986 Mo. App. LEXIS 4722 (Mo. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

720 S.W.2d 9 (Washington v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.