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
- RSMo § 564.011cited
section 564.011 RSMo
- RSMo § 565.100cited
section 565.100 RSMo
- RSMo § 569.020cited
section 569.020 RSMo
Rules
- 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. Ralph Harper, Defendant/Appellant and Ralph Harper, Movant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.(1998)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Ronald Thomas, Appellant.(1997)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
State of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Maurice Campbell, Defendant/Appellant. Maurice Campbell, Movant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.(1998)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
State of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Orson L. Wells, Jr., Defendant/Appellant.(1997)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Lacey Paige, Defendant. Lacey Paige, Movant/Defendant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.(1997)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Willie Portwood, Appellant. Willie Portwood, Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.(1997)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District