Wengler v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Wengler v. State

830 S.W.2d 520, 1992 Mo. App. LEXIS 716, 1992 WL 82689

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 28, 1992·No. No. 60525·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion following an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not [521]*521clearly 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 the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion following an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not [521]*521clearly 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).

Wengler v. State, 830 S.W.2d 520, 1992 Mo. App. LEXIS 716, 1992 WL 82689 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

830 S.W.2d 520 (Wengler v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.