Watkins v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Watkins v. State

926 S.W.2d 547, 1996 Mo. App. LEXIS 1341, 1996 WL 422036

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided July 30, 1996·No. No. 69394·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Aaron W. Watkins, appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County denying his Rule 24.035 motion with[548]*548out an evidentiary hearing because the motion was not filed within the time constraints of Rule 24.035(b). We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find the judgment denying the Rule 24.035 motion is not clearly erroneous. Day v. State, 770 S.W.2d 692, 695 (Mo.banc 1989). As an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose, we affirm 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.

Appellant, Aaron W. Watkins, appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County denying his Rule 24.035 motion with[548]*548out an evidentiary hearing because the motion was not filed within the time constraints of Rule 24.035(b). We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find the judgment denying the Rule 24.035 motion is not clearly erroneous. Day v. State, 770 S.W.2d 692, 695 (Mo.banc 1989). As an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose, we affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Watkins v. State, 926 S.W.2d 547, 1996 Mo. App. LEXIS 1341, 1996 WL 422036 (Mo. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

926 S.W.2d 547 (Watkins v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related