Case Name: Michael J. HOUSTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2018-08-14
Citations: 556 S.W.3d 124
Docket Number: No. ED 105857
Parties: Michael J. HOUSTON, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 556
Pages: 124–124

Head Matter:
Michael J. HOUSTON, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 105857
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR.
FILED: August 14, 2018
Gwenda Renee Robinson, 1010 Market St., Ste 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101, for appellant.
Joshua D. Hawley, Robert J. Bartholomew, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102, for respondent.
Before Kurt S. Odenwald, P.J., Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., J., and Colleen Dolan, J., concur.
ORDER

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Michael J. Houston ("Houston") appeals from the motion court's denial of his Rule 29.15 motion without an evidentiary hearing. Houston raises two points on appeal, each charging the motion court with clear error for denying his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims. Specifically, Houston asserts that defense counsel gave ineffective assistance because she neglected to request a mistrial after learning that a juror knew a witness, and for conducting an inadequate voir dire. Because the record does not reveal any bias on the part of the juror at issue, nor show that Houston suffered any prejudice resulting from counsel's voir dire, we affirm.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).