History
  • No items yet
midpage
Ball v. State
884 S.W.2d 62
| Mo. Ct. App. | 1994
|
Check Treatment

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 clearly erroneous, and an extended opinion would have no pree-*63edential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Case Details

Case Name: Ball v. State
Court Name: Missouri Court of Appeals
Date Published: Jul 26, 1994
Citation: 884 S.W.2d 62
Docket Number: No. 65239
Court Abbreviation: Mo. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.