Anderson v. State

ORDER PER CURIAM. Antonio Anderson appeals from the motion court’s judgment denying his Rule 29.15 1 motion. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, and we conclude the motion court’s denial of post-conviction relief was not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a *495 memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties, for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). Footnotes [1] All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P.2010, unless otherwise indicated.