Case Name: Anthony D. JOHNSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2003-07-22
Citations: 110 S.W.3d 871
Docket Number: No. ED 81544
Parties: Anthony D. JOHNSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, P.J., WILLIAM H. CRANDALL, Jr., J„ LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 110
Pages: 871–872

Head Matter:
Anthony D. JOHNSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 81544.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District. Division Three.
July 22, 2003.
Mary S. Choi, St. Louis, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, Anne E. Edgington, Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, P.J., WILLIAM H. CRANDALL, Jr., J„ LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Anthony Johnson appeals from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. He asserts that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial.
The judgment of the motion court is based on findings of fact and conclusions of law that are not clearly erroneous. An opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, which sets forth the facts and reasons for this order.
We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).