Watson v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Watson v. State

650 S.W.2d 639, 1983 Mo. App. LEXIS 4393

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 1, 1983

DocketNo. 45601

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 650 S.W.2d 639 (Watson 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

Watson v. State, 650 S.W.2d 639, 1983 Mo. App. LEXIS 4393 (Mo. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

CRIST, Judge.

Appeal from a denial of a Rule 27.26 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.

On October 15, 1980, movant pled guilty to three counts of first degree robbery. He was sentenced to concurrent terms of ten years imprisonment on each count.

The record of the plea and sentence hearing clearly shows movant voluntarily and understandingly entered his plea of guilty to the three counts of robbery. Carpenter v. State, 479 S.W.2d 466, 469 (Mo.1972).

However at the Rule 27.26 evidentiary hearing, defendant changed his story. He said he lied at the advice of his appointed counsel at the plea and sentence hearing. He called his chief alibi witness, a prison inmate, to prove his lawyer was incompetent in that she failed to interview this, witness before defendant pled guilty. The trial court found movant and his witness testified falsely at the Rule 27.26 motion evidentiary hearing. Shoemake v. State, 462 S.W.2d 772, 775 (Mo.1971).

The judgment of the Rule 27.26 motion trial court was based on findings of fact which are not clearly erroneous. Hutchins v. State, 624 S.W.2d 191,192 (Mo.App.1981). No error of law appears. An opinion would have no precedential value.

Affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.-16(b).

CRANDALL, P.J., and REINHARD, J., concur.

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