Case ID: sw3d_204/html/0688-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Eugene BICKLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. ED 87103.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
    Oct. 31, 2006.
    S. Kristina Starke, Assistant Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Daniel N. McPherson, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondents.
    Before GEORGE W. DRAPER III, P.J., GARY M. GAERTNER, SR., J., and ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Eugene Bickley (“Movant”), appeals from the judgment of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis denying his amended Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. Following a jury trial, Movant was convicted of one count of first degree murder, section 565.020, RSMo 1996, and one count of armed criminal action, section 571.015. Movant was sentenced as a prior offender to concurrent sentences of life without parole and life, respectively. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. As an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose, we affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. 
      
      . All statutory references are to RSMo 1996 unless otherwise indicated.