NORTON v. STATE, 66 S.W.3d 27 (Mo.App.E.D. 2001)

TERRY NORTON, Appellant, v. STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent.

No. ED 79003Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
October 23, 2001

[EDITORS’ NOTE: THIS OPINION IS SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION OR TRANSFER TO THE SUPREME COURT.]

Appeal from the Circuit Court of St. Charles County, Hon. Lucy D. Rauch.

Edward Scott Thompson, Assistant Public Defender, 1221 Locust Ste. 350, St. Louis, MO, 63103, for Appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Shaun J. Mackelprang, Asst. Atty. Gen,, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO, 65102, for Respondent.

Page 28

Before Sherri B. Sullivan, P.J., Lawrence G. Crahan, J., and Lawrence E. Mooney, J.

ORDER
PER CURIAM.

Terry Norton (Appellant) appeals from the trial court’s Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law denying his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Missouri Rule of Criminal Procedure 24.035 without an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the trial court are not clearly erroneous. Moss v. State, 10 S.W.3d 508, 511 (Mo.banc 2000). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

Sullivan, P.J., Crahan, J, Mooney, J., concurring.