Case ID: sw3d_487/html/0493-02.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

Raymon DENZMORE, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. ED 103048
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.
    
    Filed: April 19, 2016
    Rosalyn Koch, Missouri Public Defender, Woodrail Centre, 1000 West Nifong, Building 7, Suite 100, Columbia, Missouri 65203, John K. Tucci, 720 Olive Street, Suite 1600, St. Louis, Missouri 63101, for Appellant.
    Evan J. Buchheim, Assistant Attorney General, PO Box 899, Jefferson City, Missouri 65102, for Respondent.
    
      Before Philip M. Hess, P.J,, Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., J. and Angela T. Quigless, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM

Raymon Denzmore (Movant) appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an eviden-tiary hearing. On appeal, Movant claims the motion court clearly erred in denying his post-conviction motion because he proved that his trial counsel was ineffective. Specifically, Movant claims his trial counsel was ineffective for (1) failing to call Movant’s brother to testify as an alibi witness, and (2) conceding Movant’s guilt on two of his charged crimes. Finding no error, we affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and have determined that an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. Rule 30.25(b).