From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Whittaker v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four
Aug 1, 2000
23 S.W.3d 260 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000)

Opinion

No. ED77298

August 1, 2000

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

Raymun Jared Capelovitch, Office of Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.

John Munson Morris III, Office of Attorney General, Jefferson City MO, for respondent.

Before Mooney, P.J., Simon, J. and Sullivan, J.



ORDER

Romell Whittaker (Movant) appeals from the judgment of the circuit court denying his Rule 24.035 motion without a hearing. 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

Whittaker v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four
Aug 1, 2000
23 S.W.3d 260 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000)
Case details for

Whittaker v. State

Case Details

Full title:ROMELL WHITTAKER, Appellant, vs. STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent

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

Date published: Aug 1, 2000

Citations

23 S.W.3d 260 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000)