¶1ORDER
¶2Jemal Davis appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We find that the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting for the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment under Rule 84.16(b).