Hernandez v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Hernandez v. State

434 S.W.3d 540, 2014 WL 2883432, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 717

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 24, 2014·No. No. WD 76425·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Enrique Hernandez appeals from the motion court’s denial of his Rule 24.035 motion. Hernandez argues that the trial court clearly erred in denying his motion because he received ineffective assistance of counsel in that his plea counsel misled him to believe that if he pleaded guilty to murder in the second degree and armed criminal action, he would be sentenced to ten to fifteen years in prison. Hernandez asserts that he would not have pleaded guilty but for his plea counsel’s misleading statements about the duration of the sentence. Finding no error, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Enrique Hernandez appeals from the motion court’s denial of his Rule 24.035 motion. Hernandez argues that the trial court clearly erred in denying his motion because he received ineffective assistance of counsel in that his plea counsel misled him to believe that if he pleaded guilty to murder in the second degree and armed criminal action, he would be sentenced to ten to fifteen years in prison. Hernandez asserts that he would not have pleaded guilty but for his plea counsel’s misleading statements about the duration of the sentence. Finding no error, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

Hernandez v. State, 434 S.W.3d 540, 2014 WL 2883432, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 717 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

434 S.W.3d 540 (Hernandez v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.