DAVIS v. STATE (2022)

ORDER

Zachary Robert Davis (“Davis”) appeals from the motion court's judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, Davis argues the motion court erred because his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to file motions to suppress evidence or object to evidence obtained from the console of his vehicle and evidence obtained from his cell phone. We affirm. A published opinion would have no precedential value. We have provided the parties with an unpublished memorandum that sets forth the reasons for this order. Rule 84.16(b).

PER CURIAM