From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pankins v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One
Sep 14, 1999
2 S.W.3d 842 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999)

Opinion

No. ED 75542

September 14, 1999

Appeal from the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis; Margaret M. Neill, Judge.

Douglas R. Hoff, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Stacy L. Anderson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before Gary M. Gaertner, P.J. and Paul J. Simon and James R. Dowd, JJ.



ORDER


Michael Pankins (Movant) files this appeal from the motion court's judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion. In his appeal, Movant contends his post-conviction counsel abandoned him.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court's determination is not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).


Summaries of

Pankins v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One
Sep 14, 1999
2 S.W.3d 842 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999)
Case details for

Pankins v. State

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL PANKINS, APPELLANT v. STATE OF MISSOURI, RESPONDENT

Court:Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One

Date published: Sep 14, 1999

Citations

2 S.W.3d 842 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999)