¶1 ORDER
¶2 James Morgan (Movant) appeals from the motion court’s denial, following an evi-dentiary hearing, of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. Movant claims that he received ineffective assistance from his plea and sentencing counsel, who represented Movant when he pled guilty to burglary in the first degree, in violation of Section 569.160. Movant was sentenced to eight years in prison. We affirm.
¶3 We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no prece-dential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).