Case ID: sw2d_841/html/0776-01.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

Donald Lee YOUNG, Defendant-Movant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondents Respondent.
    No. 61147.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
    Nov. 17, 1992.
    Judith C. LaRose, Columbia, for defendant-movant.
    William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Hugh L. Marshall, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent-respondent.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Donald Lee Young, appeals from the denial of his Rule 27.26 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the record as submitted, and conclude that the trial court’s judgment is based upon findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous; no error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).