ORDER

Franklin Ashley appeals from the motion court’s denial of his motion to reopen his post-conviction proceedings. Ashley contends that the motion court erred because: (1) the amended motion filed by post-conviction counsel failed to assert sufficient facts to prove Ashley’s claims for *351 post-conviction relief; (2) the motion court improperly interpreted Rule 29.15(e) regarding post-conviction counsel’s duties; and (3) the motion court incorrectly limited the circumstances in which abandonment may be found. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).