Case Name: William Rushing WRIGHT, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2002-06-11
Citations: 81 S.W.3d 656
Docket Number: No. ED 80177
Parties: William Rushing WRIGHT, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before GARY M. GAERTNER, P. J., PAUL J. SIMON, J., and CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 81
Pages: 656–657

Head Matter:
William Rushing WRIGHT, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 80177.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
June 11, 2002.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Aug. 7, 2002.
Lisa M. Stroup, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Evan J. Buchheim, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before GARY M. GAERTNER, P. J., PAUL J. SIMON, J., and CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
William Rushing Wright ("movant") appeals the judgment of the motion court denying his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Missouri Supreme Court Rule 29.15 on the merits without an evi-dentiary hearing. In his motion, movant claims he was denied effective assistance of counsel by the failure of his counsel to assert certain objections at trial.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).