Couch v. State

182 S.W.3d 717, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 81, 2006 WL 163216
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedJanuary 24, 2006
DocketED 85702
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 182 S.W.3d 717 (Couch 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.

Bluebook
Couch v. State, 182 S.W.3d 717, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 81, 2006 WL 163216 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Christopher Couch, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, movant argues that his plea counsel rendered ineffective assistance by promising him that he would not receive more than a ten-year sentence if he pled guilty.

The motion court’s findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An opinion would have no prec-edential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

Related

Griffin v. Hughey
182 S.W.3d 717 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
182 S.W.3d 717, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 81, 2006 WL 163216, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/couch-v-state-moctapp-2006.