Case ID: sw2d_979/html/0209-01.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

Leonard BRADDOCK, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
    No. 73828.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
    Sept. 15, 1998.
    Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Nov. 6, 1998.
    
      David C. Hemingway, Asst. Sp. Public Defender, St. Louis, for movant/appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Jill C. LaHue, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent/respondent.
    Before SIMON, P.J., and CRANE and MOONEY, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Leonard Braddock, appeals the denial on the merits of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evi-dentiary hearing. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous, and an extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).