Case Name: Roderick FAREWELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2018-08-14
Citations: 553 S.W.3d 892
Docket Number: No. ED 105333
Parties: Roderick FAREWELL, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before Philip M. Hess, P.J. and Robert G. Dowd, Jr. and Mary K. Hoff, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 553
Pages: 892–893

Head Matter:
Roderick FAREWELL, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 105333
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.
Filed: August 14, 2018
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: Mary S. Choi, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101.
ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT: Joshua D. Hawley, Attorney General, Mary H. Moore, Asst. Attorney General, P. O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102-0899.
Before Philip M. Hess, P.J. and Robert G. Dowd, Jr. and Mary K. Hoff, JJ.
ORDER

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Roderick Farewell appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous. We affirm.
An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).