Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Andy D. TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant; Andy D. TAYLOR, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent-Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1997-02-25
Citations: 939 S.W.2d 535
Docket Number: Nos. 69391, 70989
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Andy D. TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant. Andy D. TAYLOR, 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: 939
Pages: 535–536

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Andy D. TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant. Andy D. TAYLOR, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent-Respondent.
Nos. 69391, 70989.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Feb. 25, 1997.
Gary E. Brotherton, Asst. Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.
Andy D. Taylor, Pacific, pro se.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Jill C. LaHue, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before DOWD, P.J., and REINHARD and GARY M. GAERTNER, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals the judgment upon his conviction by a jury of one count of first-degree assault, § 565.050, RSMo 1994, and one count of armed criminal action, § 571.015, RSMo 1994, for which he was sentenced as a prior offender to two concurrent terms of life imprisonment to be served consecutively with a previous, unrelated sentence. Defendant also appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. We affirm.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. The judgments are affirmed in accordance with Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).