Wiggins v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Wiggins v. State

512 S.W.3d 106, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 133, 2017 WL 895928

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 7, 2017

DocketNo. ED 103982

StatusPublished

This text of 512 S.W.3d 106 (Wiggins 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

Wiggins v. State, 512 S.W.3d 106, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 133, 2017 WL 895928 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Corey A. Wiggins (“Wiggins”) appeals from the motion court’s denial of his amended Rule 24.035 motion following an evidentiary hearing. Wiggins pled guilty to one count of second-degree murder and one count of armed criminal action. In his sole point on appeal, Wiggins argues that the motion court clearly erred in denying his ineffective-assistanee-of-counsel claim because he offered credible evidence showing that plea counsel failed to advise him about presenting a voluntary-manslaughter defense at trial.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Corey A. Wiggins (“Wiggins”) appeals from the motion court’s denial of his amended Rule 24.035 motion following an evidentiary hearing. Wiggins pled guilty to one count of second-degree murder and one count of armed criminal action. In his sole point on appeal, Wiggins argues that the motion court clearly erred in denying his ineffective-assistanee-of-counsel claim because he offered credible evidence showing that plea counsel failed to advise him about presenting a voluntary-manslaughter defense at trial.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

512 S.W.3d 106, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 133, 2017 WL 895928, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wiggins-v-state-moctapp-2017.