Legal Opinion

Parker v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided April 13, 1981No. 11900PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PREWITT, Presiding Judge.

Movant appeals from a denial of his motion for postconviction relief under Rule 27.26, V.A.M.R. He was convicted of two charges of first-degree murder, which were affirmed in State v. Parker, 509 S.W.2d 67 (Mo.1974). Our review is limited to determining if the findings and conclusions of the trial court are clearly erroneous. Rule 27.26(j), V.A.M.R.; Cave v. State, 585 S.W.2d 149, 150 (Mo.App.1979).

Movant has four points relied on. His first point contends that the trial court erred in failing to make “sufficient” findings of fact and conclusions of law on all issues…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Trimble v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1979
  2. State v. HeitmanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1971
  3. Covington v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1980
  4. State v. RobbinsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1970
  5. State v. ParkerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1974

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Huffman v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1984
  2. Davis v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1984
  3. Salkil v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1988
  4. Richardson v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1988
  5. Davis v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1984

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API