Case Name: Michael SICKINGER, Defendant/Movant, v. STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2000-10-31
Citations: 33 S.W.3d 194
Docket Number: Nos. ED 77181, ED 77303
Parties: Michael SICKINGER, Defendant/Movant, v. STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent.
Judges: ■ Before MARY K. HOFF, C.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J. and CHARLES B. BLACKMAR, Sr. J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 33
Pages: 194–194

Head Matter:
Michael SICKINGER, Defendant/Movant, v. STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent.
Nos. ED 77181, ED 77303.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five.
Oct. 31, 2000.
Rehearing Denied Dec. 7, 2000.
Gwenda R. Robinson, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Shaun J. Mackelprang, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
■ Before MARY K. HOFF, C.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J. and CHARLES B. BLACKMAR, Sr. J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Movant, Michael Sickinger, appeals from the trial court's judgment sustaining his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief which judgment was twice modified in accord with movant's requests in order to facilitate the process by which federal authorities would take movant into custody so that he could serve his state sentences in federal custody concurrently with a federal sentence as agreed in a plea bargain. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous, and an extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).