Turner v. State

260 S.W.3d 912, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 1183, 2008 WL 4051385
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Turner v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 689
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 2, 2008·No. ED 90355·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Earl A. Turner (Movant) appeals from the judgment denying his motion for post-conviction relief under Rule 24.035 without an evidentiary hearing. Movant contends that the motion court clearly erred in denying his motion because plea counsel coerced his guilty plea by failing to be prepared for trial.

The motion court’s findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value and we affirm by written order. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Turner v. State, 260 S.W.3d 912, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 1183, 2008 WL 4051385 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

260 S.W.3d 912 (Turner v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.