Case Name: Michael HUDSON, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2012-05-15
Citations: 390 S.W.3d 178
Docket Number: No. ED 97412
Parties: Michael HUDSON, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: KURT S. ODENWALD, C.J., PATRICIA L. COHEN, J., and ROBERT M. CLAYTON III, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 390
Pages: 178–179

Head Matter:
Michael HUDSON, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 97412.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
May 15, 2012.
Lisa M. Stroup, Assistant Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Daniel N. McPherson, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
KURT S. ODENWALD, C.J., PATRICIA L. COHEN, J., and ROBERT M. CLAYTON III, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Michael Hudson (Movant) appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. Movant claims that the motion court erred in denying his claim that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to: (1) adduce from Defendant testimony that he had not resided at a certain address since 2001; (2) request that the trial court remove a juror for sleeping during trial; and (3) investigate and call a witness.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court's decision 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).