Case ID: sw2d_982/html/0789-01.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

Earl HOLLAND, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. ED 73809.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
    Dec. 22, 1998.
    Paul Yarns, St. Louis, for appellant.
    John Munson Morris III, John M. Morris, Jefferson City, for respondent.
    Before MARY K. HOFF, P.J., GARY M. GAERTNER, J., and MARY RHODES RUSSELL, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Earl Holland (Movant) appeals the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. On a previous appeal in this case, this Court remanded for an evidentiary hearing. Holland v. State, 954 S.W.2d 660 (Mo.App.1997). Following the hearing, the court issued a judgment denying Movant’s motion, specifically finding Mov-ant’s testimony to not be credible.

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 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).