Opinion
No. ED 107786
07-14-2020
Raymond HICKMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
For Appellant: Alexandria A. Shah, 1010 Market St., Ste. 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101. For Respondent: Nathan J. Aquino, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102.
For Appellant: Alexandria A. Shah, 1010 Market St., Ste. 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101.
For Respondent: Nathan J. Aquino, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102.
Before Philip M. Hess, P.J., Kurt S. Odenwald, J., and Lisa P. Page, J.
ORDER
PER CURIAM
Raymond Hickman ("Hickman") appeals from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. Hickman brings two points on appeal. In Point One, Hickman maintains the motion court failed to rule on his amended-motion claim that the trial court erred by engaging in retaliatory sentencing. In Point Two, Hickman alleges trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the trial court's retaliatory sentencing.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).