Wiles v. State
785 S.W.2d 645
Mo. Ct. App.1990Check TreatmentORDER
Movant appeals the denial of his second Rule 27.26 motion without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. Movant has not sufficiently established why the grounds supporting his current motion could not have been included in. his first pro se motion. Rule 27.26(d). The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous. Rule 27.26(j). An extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose. Rule 84.16(b).