Sykes v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Sykes v. State

492 S.W.3d 630, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 620, 2016 WL 3418455

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 21, 2016·No. No. ED 103339·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Shedrick Sykes appeals from the motion court’s entry of judgment denying, without an evidentiary hearing, his amended Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claim of error to be without merit. Ño error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this ease would serve no jurisprudential or.precedential purpose. We have, however, provided- a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties 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

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Shedrick Sykes appeals from the motion court’s entry of judgment denying, without an evidentiary hearing, his amended Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claim of error to be without merit. Ño error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this ease would serve no jurisprudential or.precedential purpose. We have, however, provided- a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Sykes v. State, 492 S.W.3d 630, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 620, 2016 WL 3418455 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

492 S.W.3d 630 (Sykes v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.