Hampton v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Hampton v. State

600 S.W.2d 191, 1980 Mo. App. LEXIS 3458

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 20, 1980

DocketNo. 41689

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 600 S.W.2d 191 (Hampton 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

Hampton v. State, 600 S.W.2d 191, 1980 Mo. App. LEXIS 3458 (Mo. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

REINHARD, Judge.

Petitioner, David 0. Hampton, filed for a writ of error coram nobis seeking to vacate his 1972 conviction of accessory after the fact to burglary in the second degree. This conviction was used to subject him to the Second Offender Act in a subsequent robbery and weapon charge which was affirmed on appeal in State v. Hampton, 559 S.W.2d 224 (Mo.App.1977).

On December 7, 1978, petitioner filed a petition for writ of error coram nobis alleging that the 1972 plea of guilty was involuntarily rendered due to ineffective assistance of counsel. Counsel was appointed and the petition was then amended. State filed a motion to dismiss which was sustained without an evidentiary hearing. The court made findings of fact and conclusions of law. It determined that the allegations in the petition “are not well taken because they are not timely filed, could have been raised in either or both movant’s [petitioner’s] New Trial Motions or appeal in Case No. 74-2795-A, are refuted by the record of movant’s [petitioner’s] guilty plea in Case No. 72-1752, and state merely conclusions rather than specific facts.”

We agree with the state that petitioner waived his challenge to the 1972 conviction by failing to assert the alleged invalidity of his 1972 guilty plea at his trial on and his appeal from the subsequent robbery and weapon charge. Harkins v. State, 558 S.W.2d 217, 218 (Mo.App.1977); Arnold v. State, 552 S.W.2d 286, 292-93 (Mo.App.1977); Montgomery v. State, 529 S.W.2d 8, 9 (Mo.App.1975). The 1972 conviction was pleaded and tried as part of his robbery conviction. The Arnold case provides a good discussion of the general principles relating to a writ of error coram nobis as they apply to the circumstances existing in this case.

The court did not err in denying the petition for writ of error coram nobis without an evidentiary hearing.¹

Judgment affirmed.

DOWD, P. J., and CRIST, J., concur.

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

REINHARD, Judge.

Petitioner, David 0. Hampton, filed for a writ of error coram nobis seeking to vacate his 1972 conviction of accessory after the fact to burglary in the second degree. This conviction was used to subject him to the Second Offender Act in a subsequent robbery and weapon charge which was affirmed on appeal in State v. Hampton, 559 S.W.2d 224 (Mo.App.1977).

On December 7, 1978, petitioner filed a petition for writ of error coram nobis alleging that the 1972 plea of guilty was involuntarily rendered due to ineffective assistance of counsel. Counsel was appointed and the petition was then amended. State filed a motion to dismiss which was sustained without an evidentiary hearing. The court made findings of fact and conclusions of law. It determined that the allegations in the petition “are not well taken because they are not timely filed, could have been raised in either or both movant’s [petitioner’s] New Trial Motions or appeal in Case No. 74-2795-A, are refuted by the record of movant’s [petitioner’s] guilty plea in Case No. 72-1752, and state merely conclusions rather than specific facts.”

We agree with the state that petitioner waived his challenge to the 1972 conviction by failing to assert the alleged invalidity of his 1972 guilty plea at his trial on and his appeal from the subsequent robbery and weapon charge. Harkins v. State, 558 S.W.2d 217, 218 (Mo.App.1977); Arnold v. State, 552 S.W.2d 286, 292-93 (Mo.App.1977); Montgomery v. State, 529 S.W.2d 8, 9 (Mo.App.1975). The 1972 conviction was pleaded and tried as part of his robbery conviction. The Arnold case provides a good discussion of the general principles relating to a writ of error coram nobis as they apply to the circumstances existing in this case.

The court did not err in denying the petition for writ of error coram nobis without an evidentiary hearing.¹

Judgment affirmed.

DOWD, P. J., and CRIST, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

600 S.W.2d 191, 1980 Mo. App. LEXIS 3458, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hampton-v-state-moctapp-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack