Case ID: sw3d_461/html/0452-01.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

Rodney DONELSON, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent.
    No. ED 101295
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.
    
    Filed: May 12, 2015
    Jessica Hathaway, St. Louis, for Mov-ant/Appellant.
    Shaun J. Mackelprang, Jefferson City, for Plaintiff/Respondent.
    Before Sherri B. Sullivan, P.J., Mary K. Hoff, J., and Philip M. Hess, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Rodney Donelson appeals from the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the motion court’s findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k); Williams v. State, 168 S.W.3d 433, 439 (Mo.banc 2005). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b). 
      
      . All rule references are to Mo. R. Crim. P. 2013, unless otherwise indicated.