Lara v. State
Lara v. State
268 S.W.3d 421; 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 1040; 2008 WL 2962320
(South Western Reporter, Third Series)
Lara v. State
Opinion
ORDER
Mr. Antonio Martinez-Lara appeals the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion, in which the motion court found that the failure of plea counsel to inform him of parole requirements was a collateral consequence of the plea, and, therefore, plea counsel was effective.
For reasons stated in the memorandum provided to the parties, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.