Case ID: sw2d_838/html/0025-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Richard A. WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. 60999.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
    July 28, 1992.
    Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Sept. 2, 1992.
    Application to Transfer Denied Oct. 27, 1992.
    David C. Hemingway, St. Louis, for appellant.
    William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Rudolph R. Rhodes, IV, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Richard A. Williams, appeals from the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs and arguments of the parties, as well as the transcript and the legal file, and find no clear error in the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the trial court. In addition, we find that no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. We, therefore, affirm the judgment of the trial court pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). The parties have been provided with a memorandum, solely for their own information, setting forth the reasons for our decision.