
    Ronald OSTHOFF, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Defendant/Respondent.
    No. 60582.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
    March 3, 1992.
    Cheryl Rafert, Public Defender, St. Louis, for movant/appellant.
    William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Hugh L. Marshall, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for defendant/respondent.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals from an order denying his Rule 24.035 motion on the merits following an evidentiary hearing. The motion court’s judgment is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).  