Case ID: sw3d_464/html/0270-01.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

Lawrence MADISON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. ED 101849.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION THREE.
    Filed: June 16, 2015
    Gwenda R. Robinson, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101, for appellant.
    Chris Koster, Attorney General, Andrew C. Hooper, Asst. Attorney General, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102-0899, for respondent.
    Before Kurt S. Odenwald, P.J. and Robert G. Dowd, Jr. and Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.'

Lawrence Madison (“Movant”) appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion without-an evidentiary hearing.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal- and find the motion court did not.clearly err in denying Movant’s motion for post-conviction relief. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).