Holman v. State

101 S.W.3d 343, 2003 Mo. App. LEXIS 484, 2003 WL 1701917
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Holman v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 1820
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 1, 2003·No. No. ED 81591·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Robert Holman (Movant) appeals from the judgment denying his motion for post-conviction relief under Rule 24.0351 without a hearing. Movant contends the motion court erred in denying his claim that his plea counsel induced his guilty plea by erroneously advising him that the three stealing offenses to which he pled guilty were misdemeanors.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court’s determination is not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have provided the parties with a memorandum for their use only 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

Holman v. State, 101 S.W.3d 343, 2003 Mo. App. LEXIS 484, 2003 WL 1701917 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003).

101 S.W.3d 343 (Holman v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.