¶1 ORDER
¶2 Christopher Williams appeals the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for *378 post-conviction relief without an evidentia-ry 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 forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment under Rule 84.16(b).