Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Robert FLOYD, Defendant-Appellant; Robert FLOYD, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent-Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1995-11-21
Citations: 910 S.W.2d 794
Docket Number: Nos. 65250, 67278
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Robert FLOYD, Defendant-Appellant. Robert FLOYD, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent-Respondent.
Judges: Before CRAHAN, P.J., and CRANDALL and DOWD, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 910
Pages: 794–795

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Robert FLOYD, Defendant-Appellant. Robert FLOYD, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent-Respondent.
Nos. 65250, 67278.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
Nov. 21, 1995.
John M. Sehilmoeller, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Mary Moulton Bryan, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before CRAHAN, P.J., and CRANDALL and DOWD, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals from the judgment entered upon conviction by a jury for robbery in the second degree, § 569.030, RSMo 1994. The trial court sentenced defendant as a persistent misdemeanor and prior offender pursuant to § 558.016, RSMo 1994, to seven years in the custody of the Department of Corrections. Defendant also appeals the denial, after an evidentiary hearing, 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. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).