Smith v. State

290 S.W.3d 841, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1207, 2009 WL 2734700

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Mr. Jerry D. Smith appeals the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentia-ry hearing. Mr. Smith claims that he was entitled to an evidentiary hearing because the record does not refute the claims that his plea was not knowing, voluntary, and intelligent based on (1) counsel’s ineffectiveness; (2) counsel’s promise of a five-year sentence; and (3) a prosecutorial threat to charge his wife with an offense unless he pleaded guilty.

For reasons stated in the memorandum provided to the parties, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).