Huffman v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Huffman v. State

551 S.W.3d 109

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 24, 2018

DocketNo. ED 105507

StatusPublished

This text of 551 S.W.3d 109 (Huffman v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Huffman v. State, 551 S.W.3d 109 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Melvin Huffman ("Movant") appeals from the motion court's judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Movant was convicted, following a jury trial, of one count of first-degree statutory sodomy in violation of Section 566.062 (RSMo. Cum. Supp. 2008). Movant was sentenced as a prior offender, pursuant to Section 558.016 (RSMo. Cum. Supp. 2008), to 20 years' imprisonment in the Missouri Department of Corrections. This Court affirmed Movant's conviction and sentence in State v. Huffman, 445 S.W.3d 76 (Mo. App. E.D. 2014).

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

PER CURIAM

Melvin Huffman ("Movant") appeals from the motion court's judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Movant was convicted, following a jury trial, of one count of first-degree statutory sodomy in violation of Section 566.062 (RSMo. Cum. Supp. 2008). Movant was sentenced as a prior offender, pursuant to Section 558.016 (RSMo. Cum. Supp. 2008), to 20 years' imprisonment in the Missouri Department of Corrections. This Court affirmed Movant's conviction and sentence in State v. Huffman, 445 S.W.3d 76 (Mo. App. E.D. 2014).

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

551 S.W.3d 109, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/huffman-v-state-moctapp-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack