Case ID: sw3d_460/html/0481-01.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

Christopher PIERSON, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. ED 101320
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE.
    
    Filed: April 7, 2015
    Mark A. Grothoff, Woodrail Centre, 1000 West Nifong, Building 7, Suite 100, Columbia, Missouri 65102, for appellant.
    Jennifer A. Rodewald, PiO. Box 899, Jefferson City, Missouri 65102, for respondent.
    Before Lawrence E. Mooney, P. J., Clifford H. Ahrens, J., and Lisa S. Van Amburg, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM

Christopher Pierson appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for postconviction relief after an evidentiary hearing.

We have reviewed the briefs and the record on appeal. The judgment is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum, for their information only, setting forth the reasons for our decision.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).