Case Name: James J. SCHMEDEKE, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2004-10-05
Citations: 145 S.W.3d 856
Docket Number: No. ED 84266
Parties: James J. SCHMEDEKE, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
Judges: Before GARY M. GAERTNER, P.J., SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J., and BOOKER T. SHAW, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 145
Pages: 856–856

Head Matter:
James J. SCHMEDEKE, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
No. ED 84266.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Oct. 5, 2004.
Margaret Mueller Johnston, Columbia, MO, for appellant.
Deborah Daniels, Dora A. Fichter, co-counsel, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before GARY M. GAERTNER, P.J., SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J., and BOOKER T. SHAW, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
James J. Schmedeke (Appellant) appeals from the motion court's denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for postconviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the motion court did not err in denying without an evidentiary hearing Appellant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for them use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Criminal Procedure 84.16(b).
. All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P. (2003), unless otherwise indicated.