Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Floyd DUDLEY, Appellant; Floyd DUDLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1994-02-22
Citations: 870 S.W.2d 477
Docket Number: Nos. 62366, 64160
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Floyd DUDLEY, Appellant. Floyd DUDLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before CRANDALL, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 870
Pages: 477–477

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Floyd DUDLEY, Appellant. Floyd DUDLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Nos. 62366, 64160.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Feb. 22, 1994.
Ellen H. Flottman, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Cheryl A. Caponegro, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before CRANDALL, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals his jury conviction for sale of a controlled substance and the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion. We affirm
The findings of fact issued by the motion court are not clearly erroneous and no error of law appears. Rule 84.16(b)(2) and (5). We find no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion and affirm by summary order. Rule 30.25(b). A memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision has been issued to the parties for their use only.