Missouri Court of Appeals, 1996

State v. Ford

State v. Ford
Missouri Court of Appeals · Decided May 14, 1996 · Grimm, Karohl, Reinhard
922 S.W.2d 56; 1996 Mo. App. LEXIS 839; 1996 WL 250453 (South Western Reporter, Second Series)

State v. Ford

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

A jury found defendant guilty of an attempt to commit second degree burglary. Sections 564.011 and 569.170, RSMo 1994. The trial court sentenced him as a prior and persistent offender to six years.

In his direct appeal, defendant alleges the trial court erred in overruling his Batson challenge. In his Rule 29.15 motion, he alleges his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to make and preserve adequate Bat-son objections.

*57No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. Rule 30.25(b). The judgment of the motion court on the Rule 29.15 motion is based on findings that are not clearly erroneous. An opinion would have no precedential value. Rule 84.16(b).

The judgments of the trial court and motion court are affirmed.

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