Case ID: sw3d_544/html/0249-01.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

Steven HAYWOOD, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
    No. ED 104883
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE.
    Filed: November 14, 2017
    Randall Brachman, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101, For Movant/Appellant.
    Dora A. Fichter, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102, For Respondent/Respondent.
    Before Robert G. Dowd, Jr., P.J., Sherri B. Sullivan, J., and Kurt S. Odenwald, J.
    ORDER
   PER CURIAM.

Steven Haywood appeals from the motion court's judgment denying, following an evidentiary hearing, his amended Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Judgment and Sentence filed pursuant to Rule 29.15. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the judgment of the motion court was not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b). 
      
      All rule references are to Mo. R. Crim. P. 2015, unless otherwise indicated.