Graefser v. State

445 S.W.3d 678, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 1142, 2014 WL 5139387
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 14, 2014·No. No. ED 100415·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Roger Graefser (“Movant”) appeals the motion court’s denial of his Rule 24.035 amended motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Movant contends that the motion court clearly erred by denying his motion without an evidentiary hearing because his plea counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to explain a “blind plea” and the attendant consequences of such a plea, and that but for his plea counsel’s ineffective performance he would have proceeded to trial. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and have determined that an extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties 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

Graefser v. State, 445 S.W.3d 678, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 1142, 2014 WL 5139387 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014).

445 S.W.3d 678 (Graefser v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.