ORDER

Richard Simmons 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 Simmons’ request for post-conviction relief. We affirm.

An extended opinion would have no precedéntial 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).