¶1 ORDER
¶2Paul Williams appeals from the denial of his 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without evidentiary hearing. He claims that the motion court clearly erred in denying his motion because counsel was ineffective in that he: (1) misinformed Williams about the amount of credit he would receive; and (2) failed to interview and depose all the State’s witnesses because a viable self-defense claim would have been uncovered. Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).