Missouri Court of Appeals, 2005

Payne v. State

Payne v. State
Missouri Court of Appeals · Decided May 3, 2005 · Sullivan, Shaw, Cohen
163 S.W.3d 516; 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 693; 2005 WL 1018195 (South Western Reporter, Third Series)

Payne v. State

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Keelan Payne (Movant) appeals from the judgment denying his motion for post-conviction relief under Rule 24.035 without an evidentiary hearing. Movant asserts the motion court clearly erred in denying his claim that his counsel was ineffective, because he promised Movant that if he entered a blind plea he would only receive a seven or eight-year sentence and would also receive drug treatment.

Having reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, we conclude the motion court did not clearly err. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.