Case ID: sw2d_787/html/0869-01.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

Ronald DEE, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. 56102.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
    April 10, 1990.
    Raymond L. Legg, Robert R. Turley, Columbia, for appellant.
    William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Robert V. Franson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals the denial after an evi-dentiary hearing of his Rule 29.15 motion to vacate sentence We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous and an extended opinion would serve no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only setting forth the reasons for our order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).