Case Name: Ralph H. GREEN, Defendant/Movant, v. STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2005-09-13
Citations: 171 S.W.3d 153
Docket Number: No. ED 85027
Parties: Ralph H. GREEN, Defendant/Movant, v. STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent.
Judges: Before MARY K. HOFF, P.J. and CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J. and PATRICIA L. COHEN, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 171
Pages: 153–154

Head Matter:
Ralph H. GREEN, Defendant/Movant, v. STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent.
No. ED 85027.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Sept. 13, 2005.
Gwenda Renee Robinson, District Defender, St. Louis, MO, for Appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Ronald S. Ribaudo, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, MO, for Respondent.
Before MARY K. HOFF, P.J. and CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J. and PATRICIA L. COHEN, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Ralph H. Green (Movant) appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief (motion) following an evidentiary hearing.
We affirmed Movant's conviction and sentence for five counts of first-degree robbery, in violation of Section 569.020, RSMO 2000, in State v. Green, 97 S.W.3d 534 (Mo.App. E.D.2003). This appeal follows the motion court's findings of fact and conclusions of law denying Movant's motion following an evidentiary hearing.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal, and find the claims of error to be without merit. The motion court's findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for the order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).