Case Name: Antijuian BOHLEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1999-05-04
Citations: 14 S.W.3d 607
Docket Number: No. 75085
Parties: Antijuian BOHLEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before: MARY K. HOFF, P.J., GARY M. GAERTNER, J., and MARY RHODES RUSSELL, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 14
Pages: 607–607

Head Matter:
Antijuian BOHLEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. 75085.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
May 4, 1999.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied June 3, 1999.
Elaine A. Pudlowski, St. Louis, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Daniel W. Follett, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before: MARY K. HOFF, P.J., GARY M. GAERTNER, J., and MARY RHODES RUSSELL, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Antijuian Bohlen appeals the trial court's judgment denying his Rule 29.15 post-conviction motion for relief without 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).