History
  • No items yet
midpage
Hedger v. State
564 S.W.2d 938
Mo. Ct. App.
1978
Check Treatment
McMillian, Judge.

Appellant appeals from an order of the circuit court denying, without an evidentia-ry hearing, his Rule 27.26, V.A.M.R., motion. Appellant asserts that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to grant an evidentiary hearing because allegations and issues of fact presented in his motion were sufficient as a matter of law. We disagree and affirm.

We have reviewed the record of the guilty plea and read the briefs of the parties. The facts alleged in support of appellant’s grounds for relief are refuted by the record made at the time of his plea of guilty to the charge and his answers given therein to the court. Smith v. State, 513 S.W.2d 407 (Mo. banc 1974); Hogshooter v. State, 514 S.W.2d 109 (Mo.App.1974); and Collins v. State, 556 S.W.2d 225 (Mo.App.1977).

Any further discussion of appellant’s allegations would not have any precedential value, and would only serve to lengthen this opinion.

Judgment affirmed.

CLEMENS, P. J., and SMITH, J., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Hedger v. State
Court Name: Missouri Court of Appeals
Date Published: Apr 4, 1978
Citation: 564 S.W.2d 938
Docket Number: No. 39339
Court Abbreviation: Mo. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.