ORDER
Abraham Gilbert (“Gilbert”) appeals from the motion courts judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion. On appeal, Gilbert argues that the motion court erred because his trial counsel was ineffective for having unreasonably abandoned a portion of his planned cross-examination of the victim. Finding no error, 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 Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, we have provided an unpublished memorandum which sets forth the reasons for this order.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: