Case ID: sw3d_78/html/0241-01.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

Robert REASK, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
    No. ED 80231.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
    July 2, 2002.
    Nancy L. Vincent, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Andrea M. Follett, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
    Before WILLIAM H. CRANDALL, JR., P.J., and KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE and ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Robert Reask (Movant) appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief, without an evidentiary hearing.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find the claims of error to be without merit. An extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).