Fuller v. State

ORDER

George Fuller appeals from the motion court’s denial of his motion to reopen his Rule 29.15 post-conviction case. On appeal, Fuller claims that he was entitled to reopen the Rule 29.15 proceedings because he was abandoned by counsel. Because a published opinion would have no prece-dential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).