State of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Julian McClain, Defendant/Appellant. Julian McClain, Movant/Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
Decision date: Unknown
Parties & Roles
- Appellant
- Julian McClain, Defendant/·Julian McClain, Defendant/Appellant. Julian McClain, Movant/Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent/
- Respondent
- State of Missouri, Plaintiff/
Disposition
Affirmed
Slip Opinion Notice
This archive contains Missouri appellate slip opinions reproduced for research convenience, not the final official reporter version. Official source links remain authoritative where provided. Joseph Ott, Attorney 67889, Ott Law Firm - Constant Victory - Personal Injury and Litigation maintains these public legal archives to support Missouri case research and to help prospective clients connect that research to the firm's courtroom practice.
Opinion
This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court. Opinion Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District Case Style: State of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Julian McClain, Defendant/Appellant. Julian McClain, Movant/Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent. Case Number: 67935 and 71551 Handdown Date: 10/14/1997 Appeal From: Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Hon. Emmett O'Brien Counsel for Appellant: Ellen H. Flottman Counsel for Respondent: Joanne E. Joiner Opinion Summary: None Citation: Opinion Author: PER CURIAM Opinion Vote: AFFIRMED. Grimm, P.J., Pudlowski and Gaertner, JJ., concur. Opinion: ORDER A jury found defendant guilty of the lesser included offense of murder in the second degree. Section 565.021, RSMo 1994. The trial court sentenced defendant to life imprisonment. Defendant appeals the judgment entered on his conviction. He also appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion after a hearing. We have reviewed the briefs, transcripts, and legal files. The trial court's judgment on the Rule 29.15 motion is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. No error of law appears. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion because it would have no precedential value. The trial court's judgment entered following defendant's conviction is affirmed. Rule 30.25(b). The trial court's judgment denying defendant relief under Rule 29.15 is also affirmed. Rule 84.16(b). Separate Opinion:
None This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.
Authorities Cited
Statutes, rules, and cases referenced in this opinion.
Statutes
- RSMo § 565.021cited
Section 565.021, RSMo
Rules
- Rule 29.15cited
Rule 29.15
- Rule 30.25cited
Rule 30.25
- Rule 84.16cited
Rule 84.16
Related Opinions
Cases sharing legal topics and authorities with this opinion.
State of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Exzanthanese N. Roberts, Defendant/Appellant. Exzanthanese N. Roberts, Movant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.(1997)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Jerome Eiland, Defendant/Appellant. Jerome Eiland, Defendant/Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.(1998)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
Derek Holmes, Movant/Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.(2002)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District#ED79467
State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Derrick Banks, Appellant. Derrick Banks, Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.(1998)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Marques Morris, Defendant. Maarques Morris, Movant/Defendant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.(1998)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
State of Missouri, Respondent, v. George Ferina, Appellant.(1997)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District