Ott Law Firm Agent-Safe Plain Text
Official source remains authoritative.

Case: Anthony Williams, Movant/Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
Decision Date: Unknown
Outcome: affirmed
Practice Area: criminal-law
Canonical URL: https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/anthony-williams-movantappellant-v-state-of-missouri-respondentrespondent-17418
Official Source URL: https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=17418
Related Practice Areas:
- Criminal Law: https://ott.law/practice-areas/criminal-law?ott_archive=missouri-courts&ott_archive_practice_area=criminal-law&ott_archive_query=Anthony+Williams%2C+Movant%2FAppellant%2C+v.+State+of+Missouri%2C+Respondent%2FRespondent.&ott_archive_link_source=tag&ott_archive_link_score=26&ott_archive_link_evidence=tag%3A+criminal-law%3B+text%3A+state+of+missouri&ott_archive_location=opinion_plain_text_practice_area (slug: criminal-law; source: tag; score: 26; evidence: tag: criminal-law, text: state of missouri, text: conviction)

---
## Opinion

This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.
Opinion
Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District
Case Style:  Anthony Williams, Movant/Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
Case Number:  No. 71761
Handdown Date:  08/26/1997
Appeal From:  Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Hon. Philip J. Sweeney
Counsel for Appellant:  Dave Hemingway
Counsel for Respondent:  Breck K. Burgess
Opinion Summary: 
None
Citation: 
Opinion Author:  PER CURIAM
Opinion Vote:  AFFIRMED.  Reinhard, P.J., Karohl, and Dowd, Jr., JJ., concur.
Opinion:
DIVISION SIX
O R D E R
Movant appeals the denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. 
We affirm.  The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous, and an extended opinion would 
have no precedential value.  The judgment of the trial court is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
Separate Opinion:
None
This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.