Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Roland Emanuel WEST, Jr., Appellant/Defendant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2004-09-28
Citations: 144 S.W.3d 906
Docket Number: No. ED 84051
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Roland Emanuel WEST, Jr., Appellant/Defendant.
Judges: Before CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, P.J., ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J., and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 144
Pages: 906–906

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Roland Emanuel WEST, Jr., Appellant/Defendant.
No. ED 84051.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
Sept. 28, 2004.
David M. Newman, Bellevue, WA, for appellant.
Robert P. McCulloch, David R. Truman, Clayton, MO, for respondent.
Before CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, P.J., ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J., and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Roland Emanuel West, Jr. ("Defendant") appeals from an order entered by the Circuit Court of St. Louis County denying his "Motion to Amend Court's Record of Disposition." Defendant argues the motion court erred because the evidence left no reasonable ground upon which to deny his motion for a nunc pro tunc order. We find no error and affirm.
No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.
We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).