Legal Opinion

Webb v. State

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided March 29, 2011No. SC 91012PublishedCited by 76 opinions

1Per curiam

Introduction

Eric Webb, an intoxicated driver who pleaded guilty to first-degree involuntary *127manslaughter and armed criminal action, alleges that he did not receive effective representation when he pleaded guilty because his attorney misled him by telling him that he would not be subject to the law requiring him to serve 85 percent of his sentence in prison on the manslaughter conviction before becoming eligible for parole.

This Court has held that the failure to inform a client about parole eligibility does not render the attorney’s representation ineffective but has indicated that a plea may…

Also in this document: Concurrence; Dissent.

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Hill v. LockhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. Brady v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  3. Padilla v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 2010
  4. Reynolds v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1999
  5. Coates v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1997

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by76 opinions

  1. McLaughlin v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 2012
  2. McNeal v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 2013
  3. Creighton v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 2017
  4. Smith v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 2011
  5. Simmons v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 2014

71 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API