Harris v. State

131 S.W.3d 853, 2004 Mo. App. LEXIS 500, 2004 WL 737355
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Harris v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 214
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 6, 2004·No. No. ED 82460·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Rodney Harris (Movant) appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.0351 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Movant contends he entered his guilty plea to first-degree robbery unknowingly because his counsel failed to inform him that he would be required to serve 85 percent of the prison term before becoming eligible for parole.

[854]*854Having reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, we conclude the motion court 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 Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

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

Harris v. State, 131 S.W.3d 853, 2004 Mo. App. LEXIS 500, 2004 WL 737355 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004).

131 S.W.3d 853 (Harris v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.