State v. Todd

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Todd

868 S.W.2d 560, 1994 Mo. App. LEXIS 103, 1994 WL 18468

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Todd. Read the opinion of the Court — 1996 Mo. App. LEXIS 1793 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided January 25, 1994·No. Nos. 60803, 63484·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Michael Todd, appeals from his conviction, after a jury trial, of felony stealing. He was sentenced as a prior and persistent offender to imprisonment for seven years. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion on defendant’s direct appeal. The judgment of conviction is affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).

Defendant also appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion without an evidentiary hearing. The judgment of the trial court is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous; no error of law appears. An opinion would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Michael Todd, appeals from his conviction, after a jury trial, of felony stealing. He was sentenced as a prior and persistent offender to imprisonment for seven years. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion on defendant’s direct appeal. The judgment of conviction is affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).

Defendant also appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion without an evidentiary hearing. The judgment of the trial court is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous; no error of law appears. An opinion would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

State v. Todd, 868 S.W.2d 560, 1994 Mo. App. LEXIS 103, 1994 WL 18468 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

868 S.W.2d 560 (State v. Todd) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.