Case Name: George WELLS, Jr., Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2012-02-21
Citations: 359 S.W.3d 539
Docket Number: No. ED 96296
Parties: George WELLS, Jr., Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
Judges: Before KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J., and KENNETH M. ROMINES, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 359
Pages: 539–540

Head Matter:
George WELLS, Jr., Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
No. ED 96296.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
Feb. 21, 2012.
Timothy Forneris, Assistant Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Chris Foster, Attorney General, Evan J. Buchheim, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J., and KENNETH M. ROMINES, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Movant, George Wells, Jr., appeals from the judgment denying on the merits his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order.
We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).