Case ID: sw2d_890/html/0419-02.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

STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Mitchell LAWYER, Appellant. Mitchell LAWYER, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    Nos. 60671, 66092.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
    Jan. 10, 1995.
    Robert E. Steele, Jr., Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., David G. Brown, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
    Before AHRENS, P.J., SIMON and KAROHL, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals convictions on two counts assault first degree and two counts armed criminal action. He also appeals denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. We hold the claims of trial court error are without merit and the findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only setting forth the reasons for the order affirming the judgment. Judgment affirmed in accordance with Rules 30.25(b) and Rule 84.16(b).