Winfield v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Winfield v. State

541 S.W.2d 572, 1976 Mo. App. LEXIS 2806

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 14, 1976·No. No. 10067·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

BILLINGS, Chief Judge.

Movant Larry Winfield’s grounds for post-conviction relief from a sentence for rape — that his plea of guilty was involuntary and he did not have effective assistance of counsel — are refuted by his guilty plea transcript. Smith v. State, 513 S.W.2d 407 (Mo. banc 1974), cert. denied, 420 U.S. 911, 95 S.Ct. 832, 42 L.Ed.2d 841 (1975); Hogshooter v. State, 514 S.W.2d 109 (Mo. App.1974).

The trial court did not err in denying the Rule 27.26 motion without conducting an evidentiary hearing.

All concur.

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

BILLINGS, Chief Judge.

Movant Larry Winfield’s grounds for post-conviction relief from a sentence for rape — that his plea of guilty was involuntary and he did not have effective assistance of counsel — are refuted by his guilty plea transcript. Smith v. State, 513 S.W.2d 407 (Mo. banc 1974), cert. denied, 420 U.S. 911, 95 S.Ct. 832, 42 L.Ed.2d 841 (1975); Hogshooter v. State, 514 S.W.2d 109 (Mo. App.1974).

The trial court did not err in denying the Rule 27.26 motion without conducting an evidentiary hearing.

All concur.

Winfield v. State, 541 S.W.2d 572, 1976 Mo. App. LEXIS 2806 (Mo. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

541 S.W.2d 572 (Winfield v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related