Case Name: Charles W. EMMONS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1990-06-05
Citations: 789 S.W.2d 894
Docket Number: No. 57617
Parties: Charles W. EMMONS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 789
Pages: 894–894

Head Matter:
Charles W. EMMONS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. 57617.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
June 5, 1990.
Lew A. Kollias, Raymond L. Legg, Columbia, for appellant.
William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Breck K. Burgess, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Movant appeals the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing. Movant did not file his Rule 24.035 motion within ninety days of his delivery to the department of corrections. Rule 24.-035(b). The motion court dismissed mov-ant's motion as untimely. Id. The time limits under Rule 24.035(b) are valid, reasonable and mandatory. Day v. State, 770 S.W.2d 692, 695(1] (Mo. banc 1989). Rule 24.035 does not operate as an unconstitutional suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. White v. State, 779 S.W.2d 571, 573(4] (Mo. banc 1989). The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous. 24.035(j). An extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).