Hicks v. State

Ramone J. Hicks ("Movant") timely-but ineffectually-attempts to appeal the denial of his amended Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief to set aside his 2013 convictions for first-degree robbery, first-degree burglary, and armed criminal action ("the amended motion").1 The motion court denied the amended motion after conducting an evidentiary hearing.2 Movant's three points claim the motion court failed to make specific findings necessary "to enable meaningful appellate review of [Movant's] claims[,]" denied Movant's Brady3 violation claim using "an incorrect legal standard[,]" and…