OTT LAW

State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Larry Moses, Appellant and Larry Moses, Movant-Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.

Decision date: Unknown

Parties & Roles

Appellant
Larry Moses·Larry Moses, Appellant and Larry Moses, 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. Larry Moses, Appellant and Larry Moses, Movant-Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent. Case Number: 68968 & 72606 Handdown Date: 05/12/1998 Appeal From: Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Hon. James R. Hartenbach Counsel for Appellant: Richard H. Sindel Counsel for Respondent: Gregory L. Barnes Opinion Summary: None Citation: Opinion Author: PER CURIAM Opinion Vote: AFFIRMED. Ahrens, P.J., Crandall, Jr. and Karohl, J.J. concur. Opinion: ORDER Defendant appeals after conviction and sentence on charges of murder in the first degree and armed criminal action. He also appeals denial of Rule 29.15 post conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. In review of the issues on direct appeal we find no error of fact or law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. On the post conviction relief appeal we find the judgment is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence, the findings of fact are not clearly erroneous, no error of law appears and an opinion would have no precedential value. The sentences and denial of post conviction relief are affirmed. Rule 30.25(b); 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.

Rules

Related Opinions

Cases sharing legal topics and authorities with this opinion.