Legal Opinion

Thomas Ventimiglia v. State of Missouri

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided August 25, 2015No. ED101900PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKurt S. Odenwald, Judge

Introduction

Appellant Thomas Ventimiglia (“Ventim-iglia”) appeals from the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 24.035 1 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Ventimiglia pleaded guilty to all charges in two cases brought against him and was sentenced to twenty years’ imprisonment by the trial court. On appeal, Ventimiglia contends that the motion court erred in denying his Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing because he alleged facts warranting relief that were not clearly refuted by the record. First, Ventimiglia contends that plea counsel…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Sanders v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1987
  3. State v. DriverSupreme Court of Missouri · 1995
  4. Barnett v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 2003
  5. Vaca v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 2010

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. KIMBERLY K. HENDERSON v. STATE OF MISSOURIMissouri Court of Appeals · 2025
  2. Kurtis D. Newlon v. State of MissouriMissouri Court of Appeals · 2021
  3. Malcolm Couch v. State of MissouriMissouri Court of Appeals · 2020
  4. Matthew D. Martin v. State of MissouriMissouri Court of Appeals · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API