Case Name: Scott L. BRAGG, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2005-11-15
Citations: 176 S.W.3d 176
Docket Number: No. ED 85335
Parties: Scott L. BRAGG, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before MARY K. HOFF, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J., and PATRICIA L. COHEN, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 176
Pages: 176–176

Head Matter:
Scott L. BRAGG, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 85335.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Nov. 15, 2005.
Timothy J. Fornens, Assistant Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Shaun J. Mackelprang, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before MARY K. HOFF, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J., and PATRICIA L. COHEN, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Scott L. Bragg ("Movant") appeals from the judgment of the Circuit Court of Cape Girardeau County denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. In his appeal, Mov-ant argues that the motion court clearly erred when it found that the record contained a sufficient factual basis to support his guilty plea and conviction. Movant likewise contends that the motion court erred in failing to find that plea counsel rendered ineffective assistance in that: (1) plea counsel's financial interest in obtaining payment for his services caused him to pressure Movant to plead guilty; (2) plea counsel failed to move for change of judge or change of venue; and (3) plea counsel failed to investigate two witness.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court's decision was not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.
We affirm the award pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).