Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Lorenzo CALLIES, Defendant/Appellant; Lorenzo CALLIES, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1997-03-18
Citations: 941 S.W.2d 766
Docket Number: Nos. 68008, 70462
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Lorenzo CALLIES, Defendant/Appellant. Lorenzo CALLIES, 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: 766–767

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Lorenzo CALLIES, Defendant/Appellant. Lorenzo CALLIES, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
Nos. 68008, 70462.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
March 18, 1997.
John M. Schilmoeller, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for movanVappellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, Gregory L. Barnes, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, for respondent/respondent.
Before DOWD, P.J., and REINHARD and GARY M. GAERTNER, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals after his conviction by a jury of one count of stealing a motor vehicle, § 570.030, RSMo 1986. Defendant also appeals the partial denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. 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. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).