Case Name: Sidney DUNLAP, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2003-02-04
Citations: 96 S.W.3d 915
Docket Number: No. ED 81108
Parties: Sidney DUNLAP, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., P.J., MARY K. HOFF, J., and GEORGE W. DRAPER III, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 96
Pages: 915–915

Head Matter:
Sidney DUNLAP, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 81108.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Feb. 4, 2003.
Ellen H. Flottman, Assistant State Public Defender, Columbia, MO, for Appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, Joel A. Block, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for Respondent.
Before ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., P.J., MARY K. HOFF, J., and GEORGE W. DRAPER III, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Sidney Dunlap (hereinafter, "Movant") appeals from the motion court's judgment denying his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 29.15 after an eviden-tiary hearing on some of the claims in his post-conviction motion. Movant claims his trial counsel denied him effective assistance of counsel by failing to object to hearsay testimony and failing to call him to testify.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court's decision was not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k); Middleton v. State, 80 S.W.3d 799 (Mo. banc 2002). An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, we have provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.
The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).