OTT LAW

State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Arlandus Keyes, Defendant/Appellant. and Arlandus Keyes, Defendant/Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.

Decision date: Unknown

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, Respondent, v. Arlandus Keyes, Defendant/Appellant. and Arlandus Keyes, Defendant/Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent. Case Number: 68195 Handdown Date: 05/19/1998 Appeal From: Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Hon. Evelyn M. Baker Counsel for Appellant: Deborah B. Wafer Counsel for Respondent: John Munson Morris III Opinion Summary: None Citation: Opinion Author: PER CURIAM Opinion Vote: AFFIRMED. Crane, P.J., Russell and J. Dowd, J.J., concur. Opinion: ORDER Defendant appeals from the judgment entered on a jury verdict finding him guilty of murder in the first degree, in violation of section 565.020 RSMo 1994; assault in the first degree, in violation of section 565.050 RSMo 1994; two counts of robbery in the first degree, in violation of section 569.020 RSMo 1994; and four counts of armed criminal action, in violation of section 571.015 RSMo 1994. Defendant was sentenced to a total of the following consecutive terms: life imprisonment without the possibility of probation or parole; life imprisonment; fifteen years imprisonment; and life imprisonment. Defendant also appeals from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b). Defendant has not briefed any issues related to the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion, and it is therefore deemed abandoned and the judgment is affirmed. Separate Opinion: None This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.

Related Opinions