Thomas v. State

307 S.W.3d 710, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 442, 2010 WL 1459826

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Tamond Thomas (Movant) appeals from the motion court’s Conclusions of Law and Order (judgment) denying his Rule 29.15 Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct the Judgment and Sentence and Request for Evidentiary Hearing (PCR Motion) alleging he received ineffective assistance from his plea counsel (Counsel).

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 judgment of the motion court is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. Rule 84.16(b)(2); 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 a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for the order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).