Case Name: Donald Lee YOUNG, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2004-04-20
Citations: 131 S.W.3d 875
Docket Number: No. ED 83473
Parties: Donald Lee YOUNG, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before GARY M. GAERTNER, SR., P.J., ROBERT G. DOWD, Jr., J., and MARY R. RUSSELL, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 131
Pages: 875–875

Head Matter:
Donald Lee YOUNG, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 83473.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
April 20, 2004.
Donald Lee Young, Cameron, MO, Pro Se.
Andrea Kaye Spillars, Breck K. Burgess, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before GARY M. GAERTNER, SR., P.J., ROBERT G. DOWD, Jr., J., and MARY R. RUSSELL, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Donald Lee Young appeals the judgment dismissing his "Motion To Reopen Rule 27.26 Post Conviction Motion Pursuant To Rule 27.26 Sub-Sections (c) & (d)." We previously affirmed his conviction for rape, State v. Young, 668 S.W.2d 263 (Mo.App.1984), and affirmed the denial of his Rule 27.26 motion for post-conviction relief, Young v. State, 841 S.W.2d 776 (Mo.App.1992). He now seeks to raise allegedly newly discovered grounds for post conviction relief.
Having reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, we conclude the motion court did not clearly err. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).