Marin v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Marin v. State

340 S.W.3d 306, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 505, 2011 WL 1530723

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 12, 2011

DocketED 94823

StatusPublished

This text of 340 S.W.3d 306 (Marin 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

Marin v. State, 340 S.W.3d 306, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 505, 2011 WL 1530723 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Isaiah Marin (Movant), alleging the plea court failed to determine whether a seven year plea offer had been made to Movant, appeals from the motion court’s Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Judgment (Judgment) denying his motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal, and find the claims of error to be without merit. An extended opinion would have no precedential value or 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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Isaiah Marin (Movant), alleging the plea court failed to determine whether a seven year plea offer had been made to Movant, appeals from the motion court’s Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Judgment (Judgment) denying his motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal, and find the claims of error to be without merit. An extended opinion would have no precedential value or 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).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

340 S.W.3d 306, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 505, 2011 WL 1530723, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marin-v-state-moctapp-2011.