Case ID: sw3d_399/html/0514-01.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

Isaac A. GATHINGS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. ED 98692.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
    May 28, 2013.
    Emmett D. Queener, Columbia, MO, for appellant.
    Chris Koster, Attorney General, Todd T. Smith, Asst. Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
    Before Robert G. Dowd, Jr. P.J. and Roy L. Richter and Angela T. Quigless, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Isaac Gathings (“Movant”) appeals from the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Movant argues the motion court clearly erred in denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief because his plea counsel was ineffective for assuring him that if he entered an open plea of guilty, he would receive probation.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. 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).