Case Name: Andre T. CRAWFORD, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2008-08-26
Citations: 262 S.W.3d 267
Docket Number: No. ED 89522
Parties: Andre T. CRAWFORD, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before, KURT S. ODENWALD, P.J., GLENN A. NORTON, J., and PATRICIA L. COHEN, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 262
Pages: 267–267

Head Matter:
Andre T. CRAWFORD, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 89522.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Aug. 26, 2008.
Jo Ann Rotermund, Office of the Missouri Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for Appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Cory Lee Atkins, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for Respondent.
Before, KURT S. ODENWALD, P.J., GLENN A. NORTON, J., and PATRICIA L. COHEN, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Movant, Andre Crawford, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, movant argues that his counsel rendered ineffective assistance by misinforming him regarding whether his probation from prior cases would be revoked.
The motion court's findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).