Young v. State
841 S.W.2d 776, 1992 Mo. App. LEXIS 1719, 1992 WL 332591
Opinion
[777] ORDER
Movant, Donald Lee Young, appeals from the denial of his Rule 27.26 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the record as submitted, and conclude that the trial court’s judgment is based upon findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous; no error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Young v. State, 841 S.W.2d 776, 1992 Mo. App. LEXIS 1719, 1992 WL 332591 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992).
841 S.W.2d 776 (Young v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Young v. State
131 S.W.3d 875 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2004)