Case Name: Jeffrey T. MOODY, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2004-04-06
Citations: 131 S.W.3d 849
Docket Number: No. ED 83274
Parties: Jeffrey T. MOODY, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before BOOKER T. SHAW, P.J., LAWRENCE G. CRAHAN, J., and PATRICIA L. COHEN, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 131
Pages: 849–850

Head Matter:
Jeffrey T. MOODY, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 83274.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
April 6, 2004.
Edward Scott Thompson, Office of the Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Andrea Kaye Spillars, Office of the Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before BOOKER T. SHAW, P.J., LAWRENCE G. CRAHAN, J., and PATRICIA L. COHEN, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Jeffrey Moody ("Movant") appeals from the judgment of the circuit court denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Despite Movant's attendance at a pre-trial hearing where the trial court found him a prior and persistent offender, Movant contends that trial counsel improperly lead him to believe that he would not be sentenced as a prior and persistent offender if he did not testify at trial.
Having reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, we conclude that the motion court did not clearly err when it found that trial counsel was not ineffective. Helmig v. State, 42 S.W.3d 658, 665-66 (Mo.App. E.D.2001). An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to 84.16(b).