Case Name: Charles BURSTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2011-03-15
Citations: 333 S.W.3d 541
Docket Number: No. ED 94950
Parties: Charles BURSTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before GARY M. GAERTNER, JR., P.J., MARY K. HOFF, J., and PATRICIA L. COHEN, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 333
Pages: 541–541

Head Matter:
Charles BURSTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 94950.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five.
March 15, 2011.
Alexandra Johnson, Assistant Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Shaun J. Mackelprang, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before GARY M. GAERTNER, JR., P.J., MARY K. HOFF, J., and PATRICIA L. COHEN, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Charles Burston (Movant) appeals from the judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Movant asserts that the motion court clearly erred in denying his claim that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because plea counsel failed to investigate and call alibi witnesses.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court's decision was not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.
We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).