Case ID: sw2d_926/html/0547-02.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

Aaron W. WATKINS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. 69394.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
    July 30, 1996.
    David C. Hemingway, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Becky Owenson Kilpatrick, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
    Before DOWD, P.J., and REINHARD, and GARY M. GAERTNER, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Aaron W. Watkins, appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County denying his Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing because the motion was not filed within the time constraints of Rule 24.035(b). We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find the judgment denying the Rule 24.035 motion is not clearly erroneous. Day v. State, 770 S.W.2d 692, 695 (Mo.banc 1989). As an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose, we affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).