Missouri Court of Appeals, 2012

Porter v. State

Porter v. State
Missouri Court of Appeals · Decided January 17, 2012 · Dowd, Hoff, Sullivan
356 S.W.3d 878; 2012 WL 123053; 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 51 (South Western Reporter, Third Series)

Porter v. State

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Timothy Porter (“Movant”) appeals the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. Movant contends the motion court clearly erred in denying his motion because there was not a sufficient factual basis established at the plea hearing to support his plea of guilty to unlawful possession of a firearm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. The motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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