State v. Kurt

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Kurt

867 S.W.2d 675, 1993 Mo. App. LEXIS 1978, 1993 WL 525034

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 21, 1993·No. No. 64360·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Bruce Woodruff Kurt, appeals from his misdemeanor conviction of driving while his license was suspended, entered in the Circuit Court of the County of St. Louis, for which he was sentenced to one year imprisonment in the county jail and a $50.00 fine. We dismiss the appeal.

Appellant originally filed his appeal with the Missouri Supreme Court. The appeal [676] was transferred to this court where proper jurisdiction was vested.

Our review of appellant’s brief establishes an abundance of egregious violations of Rule 84.04(a), (c), (d), and (e). Appellant fails to include Points Relied On, fails to include a list of authorities, and fails to provide “a fair and concise statement of facts” as required by Rule 84.04. We find that appellant has preserved nothing for this court to review. See Jones v. Jones, 819 S.W.2d 773, 774 (Mo.App., E.D.1991); Wehmeyer v. Bassett Realty, Inc., 840 S.W.2d 290, 291 (Mo.App., S.D.1992). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Bruce Woodruff Kurt, appeals from his misdemeanor conviction of driving while his license was suspended, entered in the Circuit Court of the County of St. Louis, for which he was sentenced to one year imprisonment in the county jail and a $50.00 fine. We dismiss the appeal.

Appellant originally filed his appeal with the Missouri Supreme Court. The appeal [676] was transferred to this court where proper jurisdiction was vested.

Our review of appellant’s brief establishes an abundance of egregious violations of Rule 84.04(a), (c), (d), and (e). Appellant fails to include Points Relied On, fails to include a list of authorities, and fails to provide “a fair and concise statement of facts” as required by Rule 84.04. We find that appellant has preserved nothing for this court to review. See Jones v. Jones, 819 S.W.2d 773, 774 (Mo.App., E.D.1991); Wehmeyer v. Bassett Realty, Inc., 840 S.W.2d 290, 291 (Mo.App., S.D.1992). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.

State v. Kurt, 867 S.W.2d 675, 1993 Mo. App. LEXIS 1978, 1993 WL 525034 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

867 S.W.2d 675 (State v. Kurt) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related