From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Baker v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two
Mar 21, 2000
11 S.W.3d 706 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000)

Opinion

No. ED 76050

November 30, 1999 Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied February 7, 2000 Application for Transfer Denied March 21, 2000

Appeal from the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, David C. Mason, Judge.

Nancy L. Vincent, St. Louis, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., John M. Morris, III, Asst. Atty. Gen., Breck K. Burgess, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., and ROBERT G. DOWD, Jr., and SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, JJ.


ORDER


Harold Baker (Movant) appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for postconviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Movant contends the motion court erred in denying his postconviction motion without an evidentiary hearing in that (1) Movant's allegation that appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to brief and argue on appeal the trial court's denial of defense counsel's motion to withdraw and motion for mistrial, and (2) the trial court committed plain error when it permitted the prosecutor to misdefine the term "deliberation" during closing argument. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).


Summaries of

Baker v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two
Mar 21, 2000
11 S.W.3d 706 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000)
Case details for

Baker v. State

Case Details

Full title:HAROLD BAKER, MOVANT-APPELLANT v. STATE OF MISSOURI, RESPONDENT

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

Date published: Mar 21, 2000

Citations

11 S.W.3d 706 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000)