Case Name: Joseph N. PORTELL, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1999-10-12
Citations: 11 S.W.3d 620
Docket Number: No. ED 75553
Parties: Joseph N. PORTELL, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before RICHARD B. TEITELMAN, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, JJ
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 11
Pages: 620–621

Head Matter:
Joseph N. PORTELL, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 75553.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
Oct. 12, 1999.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Feb. 7, 2000.
Application for Transfer Denied March 21, 2000.
Danny L. Birdsong, Rolla, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Breck K. Burgess, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before RICHARD B. TEITELMAN, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, JJ

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Movant, Joseph Portell, appeals from a judgment on the merits denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing.
The findings and conclusions of the motion court are based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value.
We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
. We acknowledge that Movant filed a Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct the Judgment or Sentence pursuant to Rule 24.035, which applies to a person convicted of a felony on a plea of guilty. Here, however, Movant was convicted of a felony after a jury trial, and therefore he should have filed a motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 29.15. As such, we will treat Movant's motion as if it was correctly brought pursuant to Rule 29.15.