Mario Coleman (Movant) appeals the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. The motion court's findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Coleman v. State, 567 S.W.3d 306 (2019)
Feb. 19, 2019
·
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR
·
ED 106060
567 S.W.3d 306
Mario COLEMAN, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
ED 106060
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR.
Filed: February 19, 2019
Susan L. Hogan, 920 Main Street, Suite 500, Kansas City, MO 64105, for appellant.
Eric S. Schmitt, Shaun J. Mackelprang, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102, for respondent.
Before: Kurt S. Odenwald, P.J., Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., J., and Colleen Dolan, J.
ORDER