Hicks v. State

945 S.W.2d 39, 1997 Mo. App. LEXIS 735, 1997 WL 206195
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 29, 1997·No. No. 70986·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Everlee Hicks appeals from the motion court’s judgment dismissing his Rule 24.035 motion after an evidentiary hearing.1 He alleges the motion court erred when it denied the motion because the record clearly shows his counsel was ineffective by failing to request a change of venue before his guilty plea. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Footnotes

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

Hicks v. State, 945 S.W.2d 39, 1997 Mo. App. LEXIS 735, 1997 WL 206195 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997).

945 S.W.2d 39 (Hicks v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hicks v. State
918 S.W.2d 385 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1996)