Case ID: sw3d_129/html/0383-01.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

Arthur WEIL, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. WD 62520.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
    Nov. 12, 2003.
    Mark A. Grothoff, Columbia, MO, for Appellant.
    John M. Morris, Breck Burgess, Jefferson City, MO, for Respondent.
    Before EDWIN H. SMITH, P.J., HOLLIGER and HARDWICK, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Arthur Weil appeals from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. He seeks to vacate his conviction for first degree robbery and twenty-five year prison sentence based on the alleged ineffective assistance of his trial counsel. We have reviewed the record and find no error in the denial of postconviction relief. Because a published opinion would have no prejudicial value, the parties have been provided with a Memorandum explaining the reason for our decision.

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