Case Name: Pierre DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2001-09-18
Citations: 54 S.W.3d 725
Docket Number: No. ED 79066
Parties: Pierre DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, P.J., LAWRENCE G. CRAHAN and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 54
Pages: 725–726

Head Matter:
Pierre DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 79066.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
Sept. 18, 2001.
Nancy Lynne Vincent, Assistant Public Defender’s Office, St. Louis, MO, for Appellant.
John Munson Morris III, Linda Lemke, Assistant Attorneys General’s Office, Jefferson City, MO, for Respondent.
Before SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, P.J., LAWRENCE G. CRAHAN and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Pierre Davis (Appellant) appeals from the judgment of the trial court denying his motion for postconviction relief. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the trial court are not clearly erroneous. Moss v. State, 10 S.W.3d 508, 511 (Mo.banc 2000). We find that the trial court did not clearly err in finding that Appellant's counsel was not ineffective. State v. Hall, 982 S.W.2d 675, 680 (Mo.banc 1998). An extended opinion would have no prece-dential 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 Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).