Case Name: Charles E. GENTRY, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2018-09-11
Citations: 557 S.W.3d 524
Docket Number: No. ED 106051
Parties: Charles E. GENTRY, Movant/Appellant,
v.
STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before Philip M. Hess, P.J., Robert G. Dowd, Jr., and Mary K. Hoff, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 557
Pages: 524–525

Head Matter:
Charles E. GENTRY, Movant/Appellant,
v.
STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 106051
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.
FILED: September 11, 2018
Maleaner Ryna Harvey, Office of the State Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Joshua D. Hawley, Attorney General, Robert Jefferson Bartholomew, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before Philip M. Hess, P.J., Robert G. Dowd, Jr., and Mary K. Hoff, J.
ORDER

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Charles E. Gentry appeals from the "Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Order, Judgment, and Decree of Court" denying his Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential or precedential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the Judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).