ORDER

Michael Hood (Movant) appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. Movant claims *437 that the motion court erred in denying without an evidentiary hearing his claims that his trial counsel was ineffective in: (1) failing to object to legally and logically irrelevant evidence about an unrelated domestic incident; and (2) submitting improperly drafted verdict directors for third-degree assault and third-degree domestic assault. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court’s decision was not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).