Bluford v. State

387 S.W.3d 411, 2012 WL 6139308, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1567
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 11, 2012·No. No. ED 98272·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Maverick Bluford (“Movant”) appeals from the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Movant argues the motion court clearly erred in denying his Rule 24.035 motion for postconviction relief because his plea counsel was ineffective for promising him that if he pleaded guilty to the burglary and stealing charges, he would receive probation.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Bluford v. State, 387 S.W.3d 411, 2012 WL 6139308, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1567 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

387 S.W.3d 411 (Bluford v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.