Case ID: sw2d_970/html/0875-02.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

Darryl TAYLOR, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. 73820.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
    June 23, 1998.
    Rosalynn Koch, Asst. Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen. Kurt U. Schaefer, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
    Before AHRENS, P.J., and CRANDALL and KAROHL, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM

Movant appeals denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only setting forth the reasons for the order affirming the judgment. Judgment affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).