Case Name: Darren D. ROBINSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2013-01-29
Citations: 390 S.W.3d 256
Docket Number: No. ED 98128
Parties: Darren D. ROBINSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, P.J., PATRICIA L. COHEN, J., and KURT S. ODENWALD, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 390
Pages: 256–257

Head Matter:
Darren D. ROBINSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 98128.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
Jan. 29, 2013.
Lisa M. Stroup, Assistant Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Dora A. Fichter, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, P.J., PATRICIA L. COHEN, J., and KURT S. ODENWALD, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Darren Robinson (Movant) appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. Movant contends that his attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel because he: (1) failed to call a witness who would have bolstered Movant's defense; and (2) neither called Movant to testify nor informed him that it was his ultimate decision whether 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. 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).