State v. Washington

826 S.W.2d 408, 1992 Mo. App. LEXIS 507, 1992 WL 59055
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Washington. Read the opinion of the Court — 1993 Mo. App. LEXIS 230
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided March 17, 1992·No. Nos. 57730, 60182·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Steve Washington, appeals from his conviction, after a jury trial, for unlawful possession of a controlled substance (phencyclidine). He was sentenced as a prior offender to imprisonment for seven years. He also appeals from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing.

We have reviewed the record on direct appeal. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. Defendant’s conviction is affirmed. Rule 30.-25(b).

We have also reviewed the record with regard to the trial court’s denial of defendant’s Rule 29.15 motion. The judgment of the trial court is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous; no error of law appears. A written opinion would have [409]*409no 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

State v. Washington, 826 S.W.2d 408, 1992 Mo. App. LEXIS 507, 1992 WL 59055 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992).

826 S.W.2d 408 (State v. Washington) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.