State v. Ellis

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Ellis

947 S.W.2d 466, 1997 Mo. App. LEXIS 1068, 1997 WL 325797

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 17, 1997

DocketNos. 68428, 71236

StatusPublished

This text of 947 S.W.2d 466 (State v. Ellis) 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

State v. Ellis, 947 S.W.2d 466, 1997 Mo. App. LEXIS 1068, 1997 WL 325797 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On direct appeal, Elbert D. Ellis appeals the judgment and sentences entered upon his convictions by a jury of kidnapping, Section 565.100 RSMo 1994, first degree robbery, Section 569.020 RSMo 1994, and attempted first degree robbery, Section 564.011 RSMo 1994.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no prece-dential or jurisprudential value. Judgment affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).

In this consolidated matter, Ellis also appeals from the denial of his 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. The motion court’s findings of fact were not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential or jurisprudential value. The motion court’s 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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On direct appeal, Elbert D. Ellis appeals the judgment and sentences entered upon his convictions by a jury of kidnapping, Section 565.100 RSMo 1994, first degree robbery, Section 569.020 RSMo 1994, and attempted first degree robbery, Section 564.011 RSMo 1994.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no prece-dential or jurisprudential value. Judgment affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).

In this consolidated matter, Ellis also appeals from the denial of his 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. The motion court’s findings of fact were not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential or jurisprudential value. The motion court’s judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

947 S.W.2d 466, 1997 Mo. App. LEXIS 1068, 1997 WL 325797, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-ellis-moctapp-1997.