Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Robert SCHREITER, Defendant/Appellant; Robert SCHREITER, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1997-01-28
Citations: 941 S.W.2d 562
Docket Number: Nos. 65945, 69848
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Robert SCHREITER, Defendant/Appellant. Robert SCHREITER, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
Judges: Before DOWD, P.J., and REINHARD and GARY M. GAERTNER, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 941
Pages: 562–563

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Robert SCHREITER, Defendant/Appellant. Robert SCHREITER, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
Nos. 65945, 69848.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Jan. 28, 1997.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied March 17, 1997.
Application to Transfer Denied April 29, 1997.
Raymund J. Capelovitch, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for defendant/appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, Joanne E. Joiner, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, for plaintiff/respondent.
Before DOWD, P.J., and REINHARD and GARY M. GAERTNER, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals following his conviction by a jury of one count of second degree burglary, § 569.170, RSMo 1994, and one count of stealing, § 570.030, RSMo 1994. The court found defendant to be a prior and persistent offender and sentenced him to consecutive prison terms of twenty years for second degree burglary and five years for stealing. Defendant also appeals the denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. Defendant does not address any points in his appeal to the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion. Therefore, that appeal is considered abandoned. 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. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).