Opinion · Missouri Court of Appeals

Blair v. State

683 S.W.2d 269

Type: Opinion
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Date: 1984-07-31
Topic: litigation

ORDER PER CURIAM: This is a direct appeal from the denial of post-conviction relief sought pursuant to Rule 27.26. Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Blair v. State. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by: 5 opinions

BLAIR v. STATE,683 S.W.2d 269(Mo.App.W.D. 1984)

WALTER JUNIOR BLAIR, MOVANT-APPELLANT, v. STATE OF MISSOURI, RESPONDENT.

No. WD 35053.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

July 31, 1984.

Case Retransferred from the Supreme Court November 20, 1984.

Court of Appeals Opinion Readopted December 4, 1984.

Application to Transfer Denied January 15, 1985.

APPEAL FROM CIRCUIT COURT, JACKSON COUNTY; FERNANDO J. GAITAN, JR., JUDGE.

James W. Fletcher, Public Defender and Gary L. Gardner, Asst. Public Defender, Kansas City, for movant-appellant.

John Ashcroft, Atty. Gen., and John M. Morris, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before TURNAGE, C.J., and SOMERVILLE and MANFORD, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

[1] This is a direct appeal from the denial of post-conviction relief sought pursuant to Rule 27.26.

[2] Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).Page 270