Opinion
No. ED 110473
03-21-2023
Jeffrey MCEUEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
For Appellant: William J. Swift, 1000 W. Nifong Blvd., Bldg. 7, Ste. 100, Columbia, MO 65203. For Respondent: Daniel N. McPherson, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102.
For Appellant: William J. Swift, 1000 W. Nifong Blvd., Bldg. 7, Ste. 100, Columbia, MO 65203.
For Respondent: Daniel N. McPherson, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102.
Before Michael E. Gardner, C.J., Kurt S. Odenwald, J., and Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., J.
ORDER
PER CURIAM
Jeffrey McEuen ("McEuen") appeals from the motion court's judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. In his sole point on appeal, McEuen argues the motion court erred in denying his motion because plea counsel was ineffective in failing to advise him on the elements of victim tampering.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. 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).