ORDER

Anthony L. Holt appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for postcon-viction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We find that the motion court did not clearly err in denying Holt’s request for post-conviction relief. We affirm.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).