Case Name: Eric McDONALD, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent; STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Eric McDONALD, Defendant/Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1993-11-23
Citations: 865 S.W.2d 446
Docket Number: Nos. 62553, 63522
Parties: Eric McDONALD, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent. STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Eric McDONALD, Defendant/Appellant.
Judges: Before CRANDALL, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 865
Pages: 446–447

Head Matter:
Eric McDONALD, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent. STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Eric McDONALD, Defendant/Appellant.
Nos. 62553, 63522.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Nov. 23, 1993.
John Klosterman, Public Defender, Elizabeth Haines, Public Defender, Office of the Special Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.
John Munson Morris III, David Cosgrove, Breck K. Burgess, Office of the Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before CRANDALL, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals his conviction, by a jury, of first degree robbery, § 569.020, RSMo 1986. He was sentenced in accordance with the jury's punishment verdict to a ten year prison term. He also appeals the dismissal, for untimely filing, of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. We affirm.
We have reviewed the record and find the claims of error are without merit; the judgment of the motion court is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. A written opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. Rule 30.25(b); Rule 84.16(b).