
    Ricky HARROLD, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. 63769.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
    Dec. 21, 1993.
    S. Paige Canfield, St. Louis, for appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Elizabeth L. Ziegler, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
    Before CRANDALL, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals the denial of his Rule 24.-035 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We find the motion court’s judgment is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. Rule 84.16(b)(2). Further, we find no error of law appears. Rule 84.16(b)(5).

An opinion in this case would serve no precedential purpose. Therefore, we affirm by written order. Rule 84.16(b). A memorandum has been issued to the parties for their use only.  