Case ID: sw2d_956/html/0408-01.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. Keith ESTERS, Defendant/Appellant. Keith ESTERS, Defendant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    Nos. 68863, 71196.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
    Nov. 25, 1997.
    Raymond J. Capelovitch, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for defendant/appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Gregory L. Barnes, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
    Before CRANE, P.J., and RHODES RUSSELL and JAMES R. DOWD, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from the judgment entered on a jury verdict finding him guilty of illegal possession of a controlled substance, in violation of section 195.202 RSMo 1994, on which he was sentenced as a prior and persistent offender to fifteen 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 reasons for this order.