Case Name: Ernest ROBISON, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2009-11-24
Citations: 297 S.W.3d 665
Docket Number: No. ED 92375
Parties: Ernest ROBISON, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
Judges: Before SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, P.J., ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J., and PATRICIA COHEN, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 297
Pages: 665–665

Head Matter:
Ernest ROBISON, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
No. ED 92375.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
Nov. 24, 2009.
Timothy J. Forneris, Saint Louis, MO, for Movant/Appellant.
Shaun J. Mackelprang, James B. Farns-worth, Jefferson City, MO, for Respondent/Respondent.
Before SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, P.J., ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J., and PATRICIA COHEN, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Ernest Robison appeals from the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 29.15 motion for postconviction relief, after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the motion court's findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous. Griffith v. State, 233 S.W.3d 774, 776 (Mo.App. E.D.2007). 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).
. All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P.2008, unless otherwise indicated.