Case ID: sw3d_537/html/0426-01.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

Martine HUGHES, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. ED 105198
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FIVE.
    Filed: January 30, 2018
    Kevin B. Gau, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
    Joshua D. Hawley, Atty. Gen., Daniel N, McPherson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
    Before James M. Dowd, C.J., Lawrence E. Mooney, J., and Stanley J. Wallach, Sp.J. ■
   ORDER

PER CURIAM

The movant, Martine. Hughes, appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an eviden-tiary hearing.

. We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal, and find no clear error. Rule 29.15(k). An opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum, for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision.

We.affirm the motion court’s judgment denying the movant’s Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. Rute 84.16(b)(2).