Case Name: Jimmie PAMPKIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2015-12-08
Citations: 477 S.W.3d 688
Docket Number: No. ED 102326
Parties: Jimmie PAMPKIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before Sherri B. Sullivan, P.J., Lisa S. Van Amburg, C.J., and Kurt S. Odenwald, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 477
Pages: 688–689

Head Matter:
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.

Opinion:
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 sepa rate 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).