Scott v. State

20 S.W.3d 606, 2000 Mo. App. LEXIS 1056, 2000 WL 876797
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 30, 2000·No. No. ED 76710·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Richard Scott, appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We previously affirmed movant’s convictions for unlawful possession of a concealable firearm, section 571.070, RSMo 1986, kidnapping, section 565.110, RSMo 1986, and armed criminal action, section 571.015, RSMo 1986. State v. Scott, 959 S.W.2d 938 (Mo.App. E.D.1998).

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court’s determination is not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only, setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Scott v. State, 20 S.W.3d 606, 2000 Mo. App. LEXIS 1056, 2000 WL 876797 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000).

20 S.W.3d 606 (Scott v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Scott
959 S.W.2d 938 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1998)