Johnson v. State

504 S.W.3d 68, 2016 WL 2894793, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 498
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Johnson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 531
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided May 17, 2016·No. No. ED 103194·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Rasheen Johnson appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 post-conviction relief motion without an evidentiary hearing claiming that his plea and sentencing counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel. We find no clear error and affirm since the facts alleged in Movant’s post-conviction motion were refuted by the record and Movant cannot show any prejudice resulting from his counsel’s actions.

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

Johnson v. State, 504 S.W.3d 68, 2016 WL 2894793, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 498 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

504 S.W.3d 68 (Johnson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.