Case Name: Andrew BOEHM, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2012-04-24
Citations: 365 S.W.3d 616
Docket Number: No. ED 96433
Parties: Andrew BOEHM, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before: CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, P J., ROY L. RICHTER, J., and GARY M. GAERTNER, JR., J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 365
Pages: 616–617

Head Matter:
Andrew BOEHM, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 96433.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
April 24, 2012.
Laura G. Martin, Kansas City, MO, for appellant.
Chris Koster, Atty. Gen., Karen L. Kramer, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before: CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, P J., ROY L. RICHTER, J., and GARY M. GAERTNER, JR., J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Andrew Boehm appeals from the motion court's judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, and we conclude the motion court's denial of post-conviction relief was not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties, for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b) (2011).
. All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P.2011, unless otherwise indicated.