Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Shirl D. DRIVER, Defendant-Appellant; Shirl D. DRIVER, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent-Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1995-12-26
Citations: 913 S.W.2d 113
Docket Number: Nos. 64575, 68076
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Shirl D. DRIVER, Defendant-Appellant. Shirl D. DRIVER, 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: 913
Pages: 113–114

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Shirl D. DRIVER, Defendant-Appellant. Shirl D. DRIVER, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent-Respondent.
Nos. 64575, 68076.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
Dec. 26, 1995.
Roger S. Lahr, Theresa Counts Burke, 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 the judgment entered pursuant to the conviction by a jury of one count of possession of a controlled substance, § 195.202 RSMo 1986. The trial court sentenced Defendant as a persistent offender, § 558.016, RSMo 1986, to fifteen years' imprisonment. Defendant also appeals the denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of her Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. We affirm.
We have reviewed the record and find the claims of eiTor 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).