JENNEWEIN v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

JENNEWEIN v. State

179 S.W.3d 476, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1864, 2005 WL 3467589

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 20, 2005

DocketED 86127

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 179 S.W.3d 476 (JENNEWEIN v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

JENNEWEIN v. State, 179 S.W.3d 476, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1864, 2005 WL 3467589 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Clarence J. Jennewein (“Jen-newein”) appeals from the judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Charles County,.denying his Rule 24.035 Motion for Post-Conviction relief, after he pled guilty to three counts of Child Molestation in the First Degree, in violation of Section 566.067 RSMo. (2000). The Honorable Nancy L. Schneider sentenced Jennewein to concurrent five-year terms of imprisonment for two counts, and then to a consecutive term of five years for the third count.

Jennewein brings two claims of error. First, Jennewein argues that the motion court erred in denying his Rule 24.035 motion because he was denied the effective assistance of counsel, in that his appointed counsel failed to inform him that if he pled guilty to first degree child molestation charges he would be obligated to register as a “sex offender” upon his release from prison. Second, Jennewein argues that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because his appointed counsel failed to inform him that he would not be considered for parole unless he completed the Missouri Sex Offenders’ Program. Jennewein argues that he would not have pled guilty had he known of these consequences.

We have thoroughly reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties, and no error of law appears. Therefore, an opinion would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b)(2).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Clarence J. Jennewein (“Jen-newein”) appeals from the judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Charles County,.denying his Rule 24.035 Motion for Post-Conviction relief, after he pled guilty to three counts of Child Molestation in the First Degree, in violation of Section 566.067 RSMo. (2000). The Honorable Nancy L. Schneider sentenced Jennewein to concurrent five-year terms of imprisonment for two counts, and then to a consecutive term of five years for the third count.

Jennewein brings two claims of error. First, Jennewein argues that the motion court erred in denying his Rule 24.035 motion because he was denied the effective assistance of counsel, in that his appointed counsel failed to inform him that if he pled guilty to first degree child molestation charges he would be obligated to register as a “sex offender” upon his release from prison. Second, Jennewein argues that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because his appointed counsel failed to inform him that he would not be considered for parole unless he completed the Missouri Sex Offenders’ Program. Jennewein argues that he would not have pled guilty had he known of these consequences.

We have thoroughly reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties, and no error of law appears. Therefore, an opinion would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b)(2).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

179 S.W.3d 476, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1864, 2005 WL 3467589, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jennewein-v-state-moctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack