Case Name: Billy TURNER, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2013-02-26
Citations: 396 S.W.3d 405
Docket Number: No. ED 98052
Parties: Billy TURNER, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before ROBERT G. DOWD, JR. P.J. and ROY L. RICHTER, J. and ANGELA T. QUIGLESS, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 396
Pages: 405–405

Head Matter:
Billy TURNER, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 98052.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
Feb. 26, 2013.
Rehearing Denied April 22, 2013.
Robert Stillwell, Allen Moss, Jr. (Co Counsel), Cape Girardeau, MO, for appellant.
Theodore A. Bruce, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before ROBERT G. DOWD, JR. P.J. and ROY L. RICHTER, J. and ANGELA T. QUIGLESS, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Billy Turner (Movant) appeals from the motion court's judgment denying his Rule 29.15 post-conviction motion after an evi-dentiary hearing. Movant contends that the motion court erred in denying his claims that defense counsel was ineffective for failing to: (1) recuse himself and testify that he personally heard Victim's recantation of the sexual contact allegations, and (2) conduct a complete investigation and to interview potential -witnesses. Movant argues he was prejudiced in that said witness testimony would have changed the outcome of the trial. We affirm.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the judgment of the motion court was not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k); Nicklasson v. State, 105 S.W.3d 482, 484 (Mo.banc 2003). 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 Rule 84.16(b) Mo. R. Civ. P. (2012).
. All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P. (2012), unless otherwise noted.