Case Name: Elizes CHAVEZ, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2007-10-30
Citations: 237 S.W.3d 243
Docket Number: No. ED 89093
Parties: Elizes CHAVEZ, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
Judges: Before MARY K. HOFF, P.J., SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J., and GEORGE W. DRAPER III, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 237
Pages: 243–244

Head Matter:
Elizes CHAVEZ, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
No. ED 89093.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
Oct. 30, 2007.
Margaret M. Johnston, Columbia, MO, for Movant/Appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Evan J. Buehheim, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, MO, for Respondent.
Before MARY K. HOFF, P.J., SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J., and GEORGE W. DRAPER III, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Elizes Chavez (Movant) appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion after an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, Movant argues that the motion court erred in denying his motion because his counsel erroneously advised him about the amount of time he would serve.
The motion court's findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision. The judgment is affirmed. Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).
. All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P.2007, unless otherwise indicated.