Missouri Court of Appeals, 1999

Hatchett v. State

Hatchett v. State
Missouri Court of Appeals · Decided October 19, 1999 · Crandall, Hoff, Karohl
4 S.W.3d 610; 1999 Mo. App. LEXIS 2100; 1999 WL 845732 (South Western Reporter, Third Series)

Hatchett v. State

Opinion of the Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Joe L. Hatchett (Movant) appeals from the motion court’s judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Mov-ant contends the court did not have jurisdiction to impose a five-year sentence after expiration of his probationary period.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claim of error to be without merit. The motion court’s findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no jurisprudential value. Judgment affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

*611The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for the order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.