Case Name: Randy STROUD, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2006-06-13
Citations: 193 S.W.3d 793
Docket Number: No. ED 86569
Parties: Randy STROUD, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before MARY K. HOFF, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J., and PATRICIA L. COHEN, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 193
Pages: 793–794

Head Matter:
Randy STROUD, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 86569.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
June 13, 2006.
Kristina Starke, Assistant Public- Defender, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Shaun J. Mackelprang, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before MARY K. HOFF, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J., and PATRICIA L. COHEN, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Randy Stroud ("Movant") appeals from the judgment of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. In his appeal, Movant contends that the trial court erred when it failed to find that his trial attorney rendered ineffective assistance by failing to call certain witness to testify on Movant's behalf.
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 award pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).