Wichlan v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Wichlan v. State

821 S.W.2d 534, 1991 Mo. App. LEXIS 1837, 1991 WL 264654

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 17, 1991·No. No. 59843·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Stephen Wichlan, appeals from the dismissal of his Rule 24.035 motion as untimely. We have reviewed the trial transcripts and the briefs of the parties and find that the findings of facts and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous. Because this court also finds that an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose, we affirm the dismissal of appellant’s Rule 24.035 motion 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, Stephen Wichlan, appeals from the dismissal of his Rule 24.035 motion as untimely. We have reviewed the trial transcripts and the briefs of the parties and find that the findings of facts and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous. Because this court also finds that an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose, we affirm the dismissal of appellant’s Rule 24.035 motion pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Wichlan v. State, 821 S.W.2d 534, 1991 Mo. App. LEXIS 1837, 1991 WL 264654 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

821 S.W.2d 534 (Wichlan v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.