Case Name: William C. CRAYTON, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2013-06-18
Citations: 405 S.W.3d 561
Docket Number: No. ED 98855
Parties: William C. CRAYTON, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
Judges: Before KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., MARY K. HOFF, J., and LISA VAN AMBURG, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 405
Pages: 561–562

Head Matter:
William C. CRAYTON, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
No. ED 98855.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
June 18, 2013.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied July 24, 2013.
Andrew E. Zleit, Assistant Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Chris Koster, Attorney General, Daniel N. McPherson, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., MARY K. HOFF, J., and LISA VAN AMBURG, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Movant, William C. Crayton, appeals from the judgment denying on the merits his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without 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).