Case ID: sw2d_863/html/0006-01.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

Wright WADDELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. 63415.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
    Sept. 28, 1993.
    S. Paige Canfield, St. Louis, for appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Jennifer A. Glancy, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
    Before CRANDALL, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

We find the findings of fact issued by the motion court in overruling Defendant’s 24.-035 motion were not clearly erroneous and no error of law appears. We further find an opinion would have no precedential value and affirm by written order. Rule 84.16(b). A memorandum has been issued to the parties for their use only.