Hicks v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Hicks v. State

972 S.W.2d 656, 1998 Mo. App. LEXIS 1445, 1998 WL 436570

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Hicks v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1996 Mo. App. LEXIS 521 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided July 31, 1998·No. No. 73868·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, George Hicks, appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing by the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, following appellant’s conviction for delivery of a controlled substance, RSMo section 195.211 (1994).

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the transcript and find the motion court’s judgment is not clearly erroneous. As no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion, we affirm the judgement pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, George Hicks, appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing by the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, following appellant’s conviction for delivery of a controlled substance, RSMo section 195.211 (1994).

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the transcript and find the motion court’s judgment is not clearly erroneous. As no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion, we affirm the judgement pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Hicks v. State, 972 S.W.2d 656, 1998 Mo. App. LEXIS 1445, 1998 WL 436570 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

972 S.W.2d 656 (Hicks v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.