Case Name: Damon B. HOSICK, Sr., Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2013-02-13
Citations: 391 S.W.3d 909
Docket Number: No. ED 98033
Parties: Damon B. HOSICK, Sr., Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before GARY M. GAERTNER, JR., C.J., ROBERT M. CLAYTON III, J. and ELIZABETH B. HOGAN, Sp. J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 391
Pages: 909–909

Head Matter:
Damon B. HOSICK, Sr., Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 98033.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five.
Feb. 13, 2013.
Jessica M. Hathaway, Office of the State Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for Appellant.
Chris Koster, Attorney General, Karen L. Kramer, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, MO, for Respondent.
Before GARY M. GAERTNER, JR., C.J., ROBERT M. CLAYTON III, J. and ELIZABETH B. HOGAN, Sp. J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Damon Hosick, Sr., appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentia-ry hearing. We find that the motion court did not clearly err in denying his request for post-conviction relief without an evi-dentiary hearing. We affirm.
An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).