From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Inge

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR
Nov 12, 1996
934 S.W.2d 21 (Mo. Ct. App. 1996)

Opinion

Nos. 66717, 70176

OPINION FILED: November 12, 1996

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS, HON. ANNA FORDER.

Robert E. Steele, Jr., St. Louis, for Appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, Kurt U. Schaefer, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, for Respondent.

Before: Russell, P.J., Simon and Karohl, JJ.



ORDER


Movant appeals after sentencing for forcible sodomy and denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only setting forth the reasons for the order affirming the judgment. We affirm the conviction, Rule 30.25(b), and denial of Rule 29.15 relief, Rule 84.16(b).


Summaries of

State v. Inge

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR
Nov 12, 1996
934 S.W.2d 21 (Mo. Ct. App. 1996)
Case details for

State v. Inge

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF MISSOURI, RESPONDENT, v. DARYL INGE, APPELLANT. DARYL INGE…

Court:Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR

Date published: Nov 12, 1996

Citations

934 S.W.2d 21 (Mo. Ct. App. 1996)