Case ID: sw3d_557/html/0538-02.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

Raymond W. SCHNEIDER, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. ED 105413
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR.
    Filed: October 2, 2018
    Randall Brachman, 1010 Market St. Ste. 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101, For Movant/Appellant.
    Evan J. Buchheim, 221 W. High St. P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102, For Defendant/Respondent.
    Before Kurt S. Odenwald, P.J., Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., J., and Colleen Dolan, J.
    ORDER
   PER CURIAM.

Raymond Schneider ("Movant") appeals the motion court's judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction and finding that Movant failed to demonstrate that his trial counsel was ineffective. Finding that the motion court did not clearly err in denying Movant's Rule 29.15 motion, we affirm the judgment of the motion court.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, we have provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).