ORDER
Zakary Mergy (“Mergy”) appeals from the motion courts judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. Mergy raises two points on appeal, claiming in both that the motion court clearly erred because his trial counsel (“Trial Counsel”) was ineffective. First, he argues Trial Counsel was ineffective in failing to object to a verdict director for first-degree murder that did not contain mandatory language concerning the penalty for the offense. Second, he asserts Trial Counsel was ineffective in failing to object to the States improper argument regarding the element of deliberation during closing argument. We affirm. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, we have provided an unpublished memorandum which sets forth the reasons for this order. Rule 84.16(b).
PER CURIAM: