Hamer v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Hamer v. State

527 S.W.3d 91, 2017 WL 3479654, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 784

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 15, 2017

DocketWD 79690

StatusPublished

This text of 527 S.W.3d 91 (Hamer 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

Hamer v. State, 527 S.W.3d 91, 2017 WL 3479654, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 784 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Order

Per Curiam:

Ms. Amy Hamer appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of Platte County denying her Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. Ms. Hamer’s motion argued that her trial counsel was ineffective for failing to advise her that if she did not accept a plea agreement offered by the State, the State would file an amended information charging her as a prior and persistent offender, thereby exposing her to an increased maximum prison sentence of fifteen years. Because a published opinion would have no prece-dential value, a memorandum of law has [92]*92been provided to the parties. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

Order

Per Curiam:

Ms. Amy Hamer appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of Platte County denying her Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. Ms. Hamer’s motion argued that her trial counsel was ineffective for failing to advise her that if she did not accept a plea agreement offered by the State, the State would file an amended information charging her as a prior and persistent offender, thereby exposing her to an increased maximum prison sentence of fifteen years. Because a published opinion would have no prece-dential value, a memorandum of law has [92]*92been provided to the parties. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

527 S.W.3d 91, 2017 WL 3479654, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 784, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hamer-v-state-moctapp-2017.