Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Julius NICKERSON, Defendant/Appellant; Julius NICKERSON, Movant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1995-11-21
Citations: 910 S.W.2d 792
Docket Number: Nos. 64861, 67202
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Julius NICKERSON, Defendant/Appellant. Julius NICKERSON, Movant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before AHRENS, P.J., and PUDLOWSKI and GRIMM, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 910
Pages: 792–792

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Julius NICKERSON, Defendant/Appellant. Julius NICKERSON, Movant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Nos. 64861, 67202.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
Nov. 21, 1995.
Robert E. Steele, Jr., Office of the State Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Joanne E. Beal, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before AHRENS, P.J., and PUDLOWSKI and GRIMM, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal of judgments for attempted rape, assault in the first degree, •burglary in the first degree and two counts of armed criminal action. Defendant alleges the trial court erred in admitting the out-of-court identification into evidence because the procedures were impermissibly suggestive and also argues the trial court erred in denying his Rule 29.15 motion of ineffective assistance of counsel. We have carefully considered the evidence and the record and find no error. Therefore, an extended opinion would be of no jurisprudential value. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b) and Rule 30.25(b). The parties have been furnished with a memorandum setting forth the reasons for this order.