Dwight Barmore appeals from the motion court's judgment denying his Mo. R. Crim. P. 24.035 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, and we conclude the motion court's denial of post-conviction relief was not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum *337setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties, for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Mo. R. Civ. P. 84.16(b).
Barmore v. State, 576 S.W.3d 336 (2019)
June 11, 2019
·
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION THREE
·
No. ED 106571
576 S.W.3d 336
Dwight BARMORE, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 106571
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION THREE.
Filed: June 11, 2019
Susan A. DeGeorge, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, Saint Louis, MO 63101, for appellant.
Eric Schmitt, Dora A. Fichter, P.O. Box 899, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO 65102, for respondent.
Before Sherri B. Sullivan, P.J., James M. Dowd, J., and Robin Ransom, J.
ORDER