Edwards v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Edwards v. State

114 S.W.3d 439, 2003 Mo. App. LEXIS 1425, 2003 WL 22076336

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 9, 2003·No. No. ED 81587·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Douglas Edwards, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. He contends he involuntarily pleaded guilty because his plea counsel failed to fully apprise him of an available affirmative defense or the terms of the plea agreement.

Having reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, we conclude the motion corat did not clearly err. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Douglas Edwards, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. He contends he involuntarily pleaded guilty because his plea counsel failed to fully apprise him of an available affirmative defense or the terms of the plea agreement.

Having reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, we conclude the motion corat did not clearly err. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Edwards v. State, 114 S.W.3d 439, 2003 Mo. App. LEXIS 1425, 2003 WL 22076336 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

114 S.W.3d 439 (Edwards v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.