Joseph L. Fox appeals from the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order (judgment) of the motion court denying his Rule 24.0351 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the motion court's findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k); Little v. State, 427 S.W.3d 846, 850 (Mo. App. E.D. 2014). An extended opinion would have no precedential 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).
Fox v. State, 544 S.W.3d 701 (2018)
April 17, 2018
·
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE
·
ED 105552
544 S.W.3d 701
Joseph L. FOX, Movant/Appellant,
v.
STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
ED 105552
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE.
Filed: April 17, 2018
Kristina S. Olson, 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 Robert G. Dowd, Jr., P.J., Sherri B. Sullivan, J., and Kurt S. Odenwald, J.
ORDER