Case ID: sw3d_559/html/0930-01.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

Montez THOMAS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. ED 106539
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR.
    Filed: November 6, 2018
    Lisa M. Stroup, 1010 Market St. Ste. 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101, For Movant/Appellant.
    Julia E. Neidhardt, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102, For Defendant/Respondent.
    Before Kurt S. Odenwald, P.J., Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., J., and Colleen Dolan, J.
    ORDER
   PER CURIAM.

Montez Thomas ("Movant") appeals the motion court's judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing and finding that Movant failed to demonstrate that his plea counsel was ineffective. Finding that Movant has failed to demonstrate that the motion court clearly erred in denying his Rule 24.035 motion, we affirm the judgment of the motion court.

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