Harris v. State

165 S.W.3d 550, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 971, 2005 WL 1514238
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 June 28, 2005·No. No. ED 85188·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Lavon Harris (Movant) appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing. Movant pleaded guilty to and was convicted of robbery in the second degree, Section 569.030, RSMo 2000,1 for which Movant [551]*551was sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment. On appeal, Movant argues the motion court erred in denying his Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing because (1) Movant was coerced by counsel telling Movant that he would not prevail at trial, that Movant “effectively” had no choice but to plead guilty, and that he would not represent Movant if he chose to proceed to trial; and (2) counsel misinformed Movant about the 120-day shock incarceration program. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Harris v. State, 165 S.W.3d 550, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 971, 2005 WL 1514238 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

165 S.W.3d 550 (Harris v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.