Case Name: Ricardo FLEMING, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2013-03-12
Citations: 393 S.W.3d 152
Docket Number: No. ED 98316
Parties: Ricardo FLEMING, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, P.J., PATRICIA L. COHEN, J., and KURT S. ODENWALD, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 393
Pages: 152–153

Head Matter:
Ricardo FLEMING, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 98316.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District.
March 12, 2013.
Jessica Hathaway, Assistant Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Shaun J. Mackelprang, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, P.J., PATRICIA L. COHEN, J., and KURT S. ODENWALD, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Ricardo Fleming (Movant) appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentia-ry hearing. Movant contends that he pleaded facts demonstrating that his attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel by promising that he could negotiate a better offer than the ten-year recommendation that Movant rejected, causing Mov-ant to accept a less favorable plea agreement.
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 judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).