Case Name: Horashio PRITCHETT, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2000-01-18
Citations: 9 S.W.3d 723
Docket Number: No. ED 76309
Parties: Horashio PRITCHETT, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before RICHARD B. TEITELMAN, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J., and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 9
Pages: 723–723

Head Matter:
Horashio PRITCHETT, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 76309.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
Jan. 18, 2000.
Lisa M. Stroup, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Barbara K. Chesser, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before RICHARD B. TEITELMAN, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J., and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Movant Horashio Pritchett appeals from the judgment denying his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 24.035. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court's determination is not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).