OTT LAW

State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Eduardo Hernandez, Appellant. Eduardo Hernandez, Movant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.

Decision date: Unknown

Parties & Roles

Appellant
Eduardo Hernandez·Eduardo Hernandez, Appellant. Eduardo Hernandez, Movant, v. State of Missouri
Respondent
State of Missouri

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, Respondent, v. Eduardo Hernandez, Appellant. Eduardo Hernandez, Movant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent. Case Number: 69897 Handdown Date: 03/17/1998 Appeal From: Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, Hon. Thomas C. Grady Counsel for Appellant: Deborah B. Wafer Counsel for Respondent: Karen L. Kramer Opinion Summary: None Citation: Opinion Author: PER CURIAM Opinion Vote: AFFIRMED. R. Dowd, P.J., Simon and Hoff, J.J., concur. Opinion: ORDER Eduardo Hernandez, defendant, appeals the judgment entered upon his conviction by a jury of two counts of first degree robbery in violation of Section 569.020 RSMo 1994 and two counts of armed criminal action in violation of Section 571.015 RSMo 1994. Defendant also appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion following an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would serve no precedential or jurisprudential value. Judgments affirmed in accordance with Rules 30.25(b) and 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

Rules

Related Opinions

Cases sharing legal topics and authorities with this opinion.