Case Name: Kevin THOMPSON, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2016-03-15
Citations: 483 S.W.3d 470
Docket Number: No. ED 102722
Parties: Kevin THOMPSON, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
Judges: Before Sherri B. Sullivan, P.J., Kurt S. •Odenwald; J., and Lisa P. Page, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 483
Pages: 470–470

Head Matter:
Kevin THOMPSON, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
No. ED 102722
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR.
Filed: March 15, 2016
Timothy J. Forneris, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101, For Movant/Appellant.
Robert J. Bartholomew, Jr. P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102, For Respondent/Respondent.
Before Sherri B. Sullivan, P.J., Kurt S. •Odenwald; J., and Lisa P. Page, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Kevin Thompson appeals from the motion court's judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k); Zink v. State, 278 S.W.3d 170, 175 (Mo.banc 2009). An extended opinion would have no prece-dential 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 Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).
. Mo. R. Crim. P. 2014.