Bell v. State

213 S.W.3d 729, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 212, 2007 WL 445354
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 13, 2007·No. WD 66874·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Ronald Bell appeals the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 24.085 motion for postconviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Mr. Bell sought to vacate his convictions for assault in the first degree, section 565.050, RSMo 2000, robbery in the first degree, section 569.020, RSMo 2000, and armed criminal action, section 571.015, RSMo 2000, and concurrent sentences of life imprisonment, twenty-five years imprisonment, and ten years imprisonment, respectively. He *730 claims on appeal that he was abandoned by postconviction counsel where counsel filed a “stand on” motion instead of an amended motion despite the fact that the only claim raised in his pro se motion was not cognizable. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bell v. State, 213 S.W.3d 729, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 212, 2007 WL 445354 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).

213 S.W.3d 729 (Bell v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Osage Bluff Limited Partnership v. Osage Bluff Marina, Inc.
213 S.W.3d 729 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2007)