Case Name: Larry BETZEL, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2015-04-21
Citations: 475 S.W.3d 703
Docket Number: No. ED 101094
Parties: Larry BETZEL, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before Sherri B. Sullivan, P.J., Mary K Hoff, J., and Philip M. Hess, J,
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 475
Pages: 703–703

Head Matter:
Larry BETZEL, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 101094
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.
Filed: April 21, 2015
Gwenda R. Robinson, Missouri Public Defender Office, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, Missouri 63101, for Appellant.
Mary H. Moore, Assistant Attorney General, PO Box 899, Jefferson City, Missouri 65102, for Respondent.
Before Sherri B. Sullivan, P.J., Mary K Hoff, J., and Philip M. Hess, J,

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM
Larry Betzel (Movant) appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. Movant claims the motion court clearly erred in denying his post-.conyiction motion because his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate and locate a videotape to use as impeachment evidence. We affirm.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find that the motion court did not clearly err in denying post-conviction relief. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to. Rule 84.16(b).