Case ID: sw3d_165/html/0226-02.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

Carl D. FRANKS, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
    No. ED 85571.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
    June 21, 2005.
    
      Ellen H. Flottman, Columbia, MO, for appellant.
    Deborah Daniels, Ronald Salvatore Ri-baudo, Co-Counsel, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
    Before GARY M. GAERTNER, P.J., SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J., and BOOKER T. SHAW, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Carl D. Franks (Appellant) appeals from the motion court’s denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for postconviction relief. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court did not err in denying Appellant’s Rule 24.035 motion as untimely. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Criminal Procedure 84.16(b). 
      
      . All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P.2004, unless otherwise indicated.