Case ID: sw3d_514/html/0060-02.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

Franklin Reinhardt VOEGTLIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. ED 104600
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION THREE.
    Filed: March 21, 2017
    
      Lisa M. Stroup, St. Louis, MO, Attorneys for Appellant.
    Joshua D. Hawley, Attorney General, Shaun J. Mackelprang, Asst. Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, Attorneys for Respondent.
    Before Angela T. Quigless, P.J. and Robert G. Dowd, Jr. and Lisa Van Amburg, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Franklin Voegtlin appeals the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We find the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous and affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).