State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Shelton Eaves, Appellant. Shelton Eaves, Movant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.
Decision date: Unknown
Parties & Roles
- Appellant
- Shelton Eaves·Shelton Eaves, Appellant. Shelton Eaves, Movant, v. State of Missouri
- Respondent
- State of Missouri
Disposition
Mixed outcome
- {"type":"affirmed","scope":null}
- {"type":"modified","scope":null}
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. Shelton Eaves, Appellant. Shelton Eaves, Movant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent. Case Number: 69374 Handdown Date: 02/10/1998 Appeal From: Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, Hon. Michael P. David Counsel for Appellant: Douglas R. Hoff Counsel for Respondent: Ann R. Littel Opinion Summary: None Citation: Opinion Author: PER CURIAM Opinion Vote: AFFIRMED. R. Dowd, P.J., Simon and Hoff, J.J., concur. Opinion: ORDER Opinion modified by Court's own motion on March 31, 1998. This substitution does not constitute a new opinion. Shelton Eaves, defendant, appeals the judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of assault in the first degree pursuant to Section 565.050 RSMo 1996 and armed criminal action pursuant to Section 571.015 RSMo 1996 for which he was sentenced as a prior and persistent offender to two consecutive terms of twenty-five years imprisonment. Additionally, defendant appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion without an evidentiary hearing. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the basis for this order. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to 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
- RSMo § 565.050cited
Section 565.050 RSMo
- RSMo § 571.015cited
Section 571.015 RSMo
Rules
- Rule 29.15cited
Rule 29.15
Related Opinions
Cases sharing legal topics and authorities with this opinion.
State of Missouri vs. Vincent S. Barriere(2018)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western DistrictSeptember 18, 2018#WD80714
Tracy E. Greer, Appellant, vs. State of Missouri, Respondent.(2013)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictAugust 20, 2013#ED98913
Patrick L. Harris vs. State of Missouri(2015)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District#WD78102
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. Johnny Spann, Appellant. Johnny Spann, Movant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.(1998)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
Timothy Purdue, Movant-Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent-Respondent.(2000)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District