Case Name: Darius NICHOLSON, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2007-06-19
Citations: 226 S.W.3d 889
Docket Number: No. ED 88487
Parties: Darius NICHOLSON, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
Judges: Before ROY L. RICHTER, P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J., and ' SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 226
Pages: 889–890

Head Matter:
Darius NICHOLSON, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
No. ED 88487.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
June 19, 2007.
S. Kristina Starke, Assistant Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Shaun J. Mackelprang, Robert J. Bartholomew, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before ROY L. RICHTER, P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J., and ' SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Movant, Darius Nicholson, appeals from the judgment denying on the merits his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are. based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order.
We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).