Case ID: sw2d_857/html/0444-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Darrick BARBER, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. 62679.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
    June 8, 1993.
    Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied July 14, 1993.
    Application to Transfer Denied Aug. 17, 1993.
    Dave Hemingway, St. Louis, for movant, appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Joan F. Gummels, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
    Before AHRENS, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals from the denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 24.035 motion for postconviction relief. Movant pled guilty to assault in the first degree in violation of § 565.050 RSMo 1986; possession of cocaine with intent to distribute in violation of § 195.211 RSMo (Supp.1989); burglary in the second degree in violation of § 569.170 RSMo 1986; felony stealing in violation of § 570.030 RSMo 1986; and attempted trafficking in the second degree in violation of § 195.223 RSMo (Supp.1990). Movant was sentenced to concurrent terms totalling nine years.

The motion court’s findings are not clearly erroneous, and no error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the motion court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).