Case ID: sw3d_482/html/0824-01.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

Nathan J. ALLEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. ED 102603
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION THREE.
    
    Filed: March 1, 2016
    ■ Lisa M. Stroup, Missouri Public Defender Office, 1010 Market St., Ste. 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101, for Appellant.
    Chris Kbster, Attorney General, Robert Jefferson Bartholomew, Jr., Asst." Atty. Gen., P.O. Box 899, Jefferson "City, MO 65102, for Respondent.
    Before Robert M. Clayton III, P.J., Lawrence E. Mooney, J., and James M. Dowd, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Nathan Allen appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. We find that the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).