| "{\"id\": \"11593511\", \"name\": \"Joseph MAYES, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent\", \"name_abbreviation\": \"Mayes v. State\", \"decision_date\": \"1999-02-23\", \"docket_number\": \"No. 74523\", \"first_page\": \"524\", \"last_page\": \"524\", \"citations\": \"986 S.W.2d 524\", \"volume\": \"986\", \"reporter\": \"South Western Reporter Second Series\", \"court\": \"Missouri Court of Appeals\", \"jurisdiction\": \"Missouri\", \"last_updated\": \"2021-08-10T19:14:54.598192+00:00\", \"provenance\": \"CAP\", \"judges\": \"Before PAUL J. SIMON, P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, JJ.\", \"parties\": \"Joseph MAYES, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.\", \"head_matter\": \"Joseph MAYES, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.\\nNo. 74523.\\nMissouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Divison Three.\\nFeb. 23, 1999.\\nMark A. Grothoff, Asst. Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.\\nJeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Gregory L. Barnes, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.\\nBefore PAUL J. SIMON, P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, JJ.\", \"word_count\": \"142\", \"char_count\": \"903\", \"text\": \"ORDER\\nPER CURIAM.\\nJoseph Mayes files this appeal challenging the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court's determination is not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).\"}" |