Williams v. State

181 S.W.3d 606, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 35, 2006 WL 44238
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedJanuary 10, 2006
DocketNo. ED 85229
StatusPublished

This text of 181 S.W.3d 606 (Williams 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
Williams v. State, 181 S.W.3d 606, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 35, 2006 WL 44238 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

[607]*607ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Terrón Williams, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion after an evidentiary hearing. Movant argues that his counsel rendered ineffective assistance by giving him erroneous advice regarding when he would be eligible for parole.

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

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
181 S.W.3d 606, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 35, 2006 WL 44238, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-state-moctapp-2006.