Ross v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Ross v. State

916 S.W.2d 872, 1996 WL 80964

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 27, 1996·No. No. 68314·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

A jury found defendant guilty of distribution of a controlled substance near a school, § 195.214, RSMo 1994. The trial court sentenced him as a prior offender to twenty years imprisonment. On appeal, this court affirmed. State v. Ross, 877 S.W.2d 197 (Mo.App.E.D.1994).

Defendant now appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The motion court’s judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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

PER CURIAM.

A jury found defendant guilty of distribution of a controlled substance near a school, § 195.214, RSMo 1994. The trial court sentenced him as a prior offender to twenty years imprisonment. On appeal, this court affirmed. State v. Ross, 877 S.W.2d 197 (Mo.App.E.D.1994).

Defendant now appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The motion court’s judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Ross v. State, 916 S.W.2d 872, 1996 WL 80964 (Mo. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

916 S.W.2d 872 (Ross v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related