Case Name: Vincent C. HENDERSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2015-03-31
Citations: 459 S.W.3d 462
Docket Number: No. ED 101093
Parties: Vincent C. HENDERSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before Patricia L. Cohen, P.J., Roy L. Richter, J., and Robert M. Clayton III, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 459
Pages: 462–463

Head Matter:
Vincent C. HENDERSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 101093
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR.
Filed: March 31, 2015
Timothy J. Forneris, Assistant Public Defender, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101, for appellant.
Shaun J. Mackelprang, Assistant Attorney General, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102, for respondent.
Before Patricia L. Cohen, P.J., Roy L. Richter, J., and Robert M. Clayton III, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Vincent Henderson (Movant) appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. Movant claims that the motion court erred in denying, after an evidentiary hearing, his claim that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to adequately advise him of the risks of rejecting the State's plea offer and proceeding to trial.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the motion court's decision to deny Movant's Rule 29.15 motion after an evi-dentiary hearing 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).