Legal Opinion

Pines v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided August 22, 1989No. 55375PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

REINHARD, Judge.

Movant appeals from the denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 24.035 motion. We affirm.

Movant pled guilty to burglary in the first degree and attempted forcible rape and was sentenced to two consecutive five year prison terms.

Movant filed a pro se Rule 24.035 motion. Appointed counsel filed an amended motion which incorporated the allegations in mov-ant’s pro se motion. Movant alleged, inter alia, that his plea was induced by counsel’s false assurance that he would receive concurrent, not consecutive, sentences. He further alleged that counsel instructed him to…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Chatman v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1989
  2. Wade v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1985
  3. LaRose v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1987
  4. State v. SeegerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1986
  5. Blade v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1977

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Tolen v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1996
  2. State v. GreenMissouri Court of Appeals · 1990
  3. Cooper v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1994
  4. Goad v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1992
  5. Murphy v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1993

4 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