Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Willie THOMAS, Defendant/Appellant; Willie THOMAS, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1995-12-05
Citations: 911 S.W.2d 670
Docket Number: Nos. 65642, 67565
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Willie THOMAS, Defendant/Appellant. Willie THOMAS, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
Judges: Before REINHARD, P.J., and KAROHL and DOWD, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 911
Pages: 670–670

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Willie THOMAS, Defendant/Appellant. Willie THOMAS, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
Nos. 65642, 67565.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Dec. 5, 1995.
John M. Schilmoeller, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., John M. Morris, Christine M. Blegan, Asst. Attys. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before REINHARD, P.J., and KAROHL and DOWD, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals his conviction by a jury of second degree assault, § 565.060, RSMo 1986, and armed criminal action, § 571.016, RSMo 1986. He was sentenced in accordance with the jury's assessment verdict, respectively, to concurrent terms of seven and twenty years. He also appealed the motion court's denial without 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. Judgment affirmed pursuant to Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).