Hardin v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Hardin v. State

507 S.W.3d 618, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1305, 2016 WL 7385584

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 20, 2016·No. No. ED 103901·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Terry D. Hardin (“Movant”) appeals the denial of his amended Rule 24.085 motion for post-conviction relief without an evi-dentiary hearing. We find the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous, as the record clearly refutes Movant’s claim of ineffective assistance of plea counsel.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, we have provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Terry D. Hardin (“Movant”) appeals the denial of his amended Rule 24.085 motion for post-conviction relief without an evi-dentiary hearing. We find the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous, as the record clearly refutes Movant’s claim of ineffective assistance of plea counsel.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, we have provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).

Hardin v. State, 507 S.W.3d 618, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1305, 2016 WL 7385584 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

507 S.W.3d 618 (Hardin v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.