Case ID: sw3d_477/html/0688-02.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

Jimmie PAMPKIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. ED 102326
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District.
    FILED: December 8, 2015
    Rosalynn Koch, Kathryn B. Parish, Woodrail Ctr., Bldg. 7, Suite 100, Columbia, MO 65203, for appellant.
    Chris Koster, Shaun J. Mackelprang, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102, for respondent.
    Before Sherri B. Sullivan, P.J., Lisa S. Van Amburg, C.J., and Kurt S. Odenwald, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM

Appellant Jimmie Pampkin (“Pampkin”) appeals from the judgment of the motion court, following an evidentiary hearing, denying his Rule 29.15 motion seeking to set aside his convictions for first-degree robbery, first-degree assault, and armed criminal action. In his Rule 29.15 motion, Pampkin alleged, inter alia, in two separate claims that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to file a motion to suppress identification. On appeal, Pampkin contends the motion court clearly erred in denying his motion because trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to move to suppress two witnesses' out-of-court and in-court identifications.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. 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 facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).