Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
Missouri Court of Appeals, 1993

State v. Hansson

State v. Hansson
Missouri Court of Appeals · Decided November 9, 1993 · Crandall, Crist, Reinhard
866 S.W.2d 145; 1993 Mo. App. LEXIS 1732; 1993 WL 453614 (South Western Reporter, Second Series)

State v. Hansson

Opinion of the Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals his convictions for kidnapping and armed criminal action and the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion. We affirm pursuant to Rule 30.25(b) and Rule 84.16(b).

We further find no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion in Defendant’s direct appeal. Rule 30.25(b). Nor would an opinion in Defendant’s appeal of his rule 29.15 motion have precedential value. Rule 84.16(b). Therefore, we affirm *146by order. We have provided the parties with a memorandum for their use only.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.

↑