OTT LAW

State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Elbert D. Ellis, Appellant. Elbert D. Ellis, Movant-Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.

Decision date: Unknown

Parties & Roles

Appellant
Elbert D. Ellis·Elbert D. Ellis, Appellant. Elbert D. Ellis, Movant-Appellant, 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. Elbert D. Ellis, Appellant. Elbert D. Ellis, Movant-Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent. Case Number: Nos. 68428/71236 Handdown Date: 06/17/1997 Appeal From: Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Hon. Bernhardt C. Drumm, Jr. Counsel for Appellant: Counsel for Respondent: Opinion Summary: None Citation: Opinion Author: Per Curiam. Opinion Vote: Before Lawrence G. Grahan, P.J. and Stanley A. Grimm, J. and Mary K. Hoff, J. Opinion:

O R D E R On direct appeal, Elbert D. Ellis appeals the judgment and sentences entered upon his convictions by a jury of kidnapping, section 565.100 RSMo 1994, first degree robbery, section 569.020 RSMo 1994, and attempted first degree robbery, section 564.011 RSMo 1994. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential or jurisprudential value. Judgment affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).

In this consolidated matter, Ellis also appeals from the denial of his 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. The motion court's findings of fact were not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential or jurisprudential value. The motion court's judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). Separate Opinion: 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.