" (citing McLaughlin , 378 S.W.3d at 337 )). "[F]elonious restraint is not a lesser included offense of kidnapping because it requires proof of an element, exposure to a substantial risk of harm, which is not included in the kidnapping statute." State v. Harper , 855 S.W.2d 474, 481 (Mo. App. W.D. 1993) (citing State v. Sipe , 648 S.W.2d 177, 181 (Mo. App. W.D. 1983) ). Accordingly, we do not find that the motion court's conclusion that trial counsel was unreasonable for employing a strategy based on a theory that felonious restraint was a lesser-included offense of kidnapping was clearly erroneous.
A person commits the crime of felonious restraint under ยง 565.120, RSMo 1986 if: (1) he knowingly restrains another unlawfully, (2) without consent, (3) so as to interfere substantially with her liberty, and (4) exposes her to a substantial risk of serious physical injury. This court held in State v. Sipe, 648 S.W.2d 177, 181 (Mo.App. 1983), that the crime of felonious restraint is not a lesser included offense of kidnapping because it requires proof of an element, exposure to substantial risk of harm, which is not included in the kidnapping statute. Thus, the crime of felonious restraint requires an element of proof not required by the crime of kidnapping.