Case ID: sw3d_443/html/0728-02.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

Dajuan DRAKE, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. ED 100376.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
    Sept. 30, 2014.
    
      Andrew E. Zleit, Asst. Public Defender, MO Public Defender Office, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
    Chris Koster, Attorney General, Adam S. Rowley, Asst. Atty Gen., Office of the Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
    Before PATRICIA L. COHEN, P.J., ROY L. RICHTER, J., and ROBERT M. CLAYTON III, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Dajuan Drake appeals the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. We find that the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).