Case ID: sw3d_556/html/0676-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Melford NEWLON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. ED 106329
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION THREE.
    Filed: September 25, 2018
    FOR APPELLANTS: Lisa M. Stroup, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, Missouri 63101.
    FOR RESPONDENTS: Joshua Hawley, Shaun J. Mackelprang, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, Missouri 65102.
    Before James M. Dowd, J., Sherri B. Sullivan, P.J., and Lawrence E. Mooney, J.
    ORDER
   PER CURIAM

Melford Newlon appeals the denial without an evidentiary hearing of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. Newlon claims that the motion court clearly erred because his convictions on nine counts of the class C felony of stealing and his nine concurrent sentences of five years' imprisonment were unlawful under the Missouri Supreme Court's decision in State v. Bazell , 497 S.W.3d 263 (Mo. banc 2016), and counsel therefore gave ineffective assistance by failing to file a motion to dismiss the charges and by advising him to plead guilty. We affirm.

The judgment of the motion court is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). 
      
      All rules references are to the Missouri Supreme Court Rules (2017).