Watkins-Israyl v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Watkins-Israyl v. State

392 S.W.3d 500, 2012 WL 6628124, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1607

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 18, 2012·No. No. ED 98233·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Carl Watkins-Israyl appeals the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentia-ry hearing. We find that the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Carl Watkins-Israyl appeals the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentia-ry hearing. We find that the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).

Watkins-Israyl v. State, 392 S.W.3d 500, 2012 WL 6628124, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1607 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

392 S.W.3d 500 (Watkins-Israyl v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.