Case ID: sw2d_964/html/0246-01.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

William POYNTER, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Defendant/Respondent.
    No. 72646.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
    March 31, 1998.
    Susan W. McGraugh, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for movani/appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Cristi A Ingalsbe, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for defendant/respondent.
    Before CRANE, P.J., and RHODES RUSSELL and JAMES R. DOWD, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

William Poynter, movant, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs and the record on appeal and find the motion court’s judgment is not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, prepared a memorandum opinion setting forth the reasons for our decision for the use of the parties only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).