Case ID: sw2d_982/html/0772-01.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

STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Curtis GAINES, Defendant/Appellant. Curtis Gaines, Movant/Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.
    Nos. ED 68363, ED 73518.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
    Dec. 15, 1998.
    Raymund J. Capelovitch, St. Louis, for appellant.
    Meghan J. Stephens, Jefferson City, for respondent.
    Before MARY K. HOFF, P.J., GARY M. GAERTNER, J., and MARY RHODES RUSSELL, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from the judgment entered on a jury verdict finding him guilty of rape, in violation of section 566.030 RSMo 1994; of two counts of sodomy, in violation of section 566.060 RSMo 1994; of kidnapping, in violation of section 565.110 RSMo 1994; and of armed criminal action, in violation of section 571.015 RSMo 1994. Defendant was sentenced as a persistent and prior offender to a total of five hundred years’ imprisonment. Defendant also appeals from a judgment denying, after an evidentiary hearing, his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief.

As to the direct appeal, no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

As to the post-conviction appeal, the judgment of the motion court is based on findings of fact and conclusions of law that are not clearly erroneous. A written opinion would have no precedential value. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.