Case ID: sw3d_41/html/0486-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Harry LACKEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. ED 77400.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
    Nov. 28, 2000.
    Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Feb. 22, 2001.
    Application to Transfer Denied April 24, 2001.
    
      Mark A. Grothoff, Asst. Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Stacy L. Anderson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
    Before GARY M. GAERTNER, Sr., P.J., LAWRENCE G. CRAHAN, J., and GEORGE W. DRAPER III, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Harry Lackey (Movant) appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after a hearing. We previously affirmed his conviction for the class B felony of sale of a controlled substance (methamphetamine) in violation of section 195.211, RSMo 1994. State v. Lackey, 979 S.W.2d 500 (Mo.App. E.D. 1998).

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court’s determination is not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).