Kimble v. State
This text of 283 S.W.3d 311 (Kimble 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.
Opinion
ORDER
Movant, Makez Kimble, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing. On *312 appeal, movant argues that his counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel by misinforming him regarding the sentence he would receive.
The motion court’s findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for them information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
283 S.W.3d 311, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 725, 2009 WL 1449124, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kimble-v-state-moctapp-2009.