Case ID: sw2d_862/html/0523-01.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

Timothy TOWNSEND, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. 63698.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
    Oct. 12, 1993.
    Brad B. Baker, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., John M. Morris, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
    Before CRANDALL, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

We find Defendant is not entitled to plain error review of issues not raised in his Rule 24.035 motion. Further, we find no error of law appears and the findings of fact issued by the motion court in overruling Defendant’s 24.035 motion were not clearly erroneous.

An opinion in this case would serve no precedential purpose; therefore, we affirm by written order. Rule 84.16(b). A memorandum has been issued to the parties for their use only.