Connor v. State
This text of 249 S.W.3d 921 (Connor v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
ORDER
Christopher Connor (Movant) appeals from the judgment denying his motion for post-conviction relief under Rule 24.035 without an evidentiary hearing. Movant *922 contends that the motion court clearly erred in denying his motion because plea counsel coerced his guilty plea by telling him that he was “guaranteed” a sentence of thirty to forty years if he went to trial.
The motion court’s findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value and we affirm by written order. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
249 S.W.3d 921, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 521, 2008 WL 1722735, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/connor-v-state-moctapp-2008.