Case ID: sw2d_848/html/0643-01.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

STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Anthony HARRINGTON, Appellant. Anthony HARRINGTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    Nos. 60143, 61923.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
    March 16, 1993.
    Marilynn Rydlund, Emily N. Blood, St. Louis, for 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.

Defendant was convicted by jury of possession of cocaine, a Class C felony, and distribution of cocaine near a school, a Class A felony. He was sentenced as a prior offender. He appeals the denial, after a hearing, of his 29.15 motion based on ineffective assistance of counsel and appeals his conviction under § 195.214, RSMo (Supp.1992). We affirm per Rule 84.16(b) and Rule 30.25(b). No error of law appears; the motion court’s findings are not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only.