Case ID: sw3d_104/html/0804-01.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

Fentress MAYBERRY, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. WD 61274.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
    May 20, 2003.
    Susan L. Hogan, Assistant Appellate Defender, Kansas City, MO, for appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Charnette D. Douglass, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
    Before HOWARD, P.J., and LOWENSTEIN and HARDWICK, JJ.
   Order

PER CURIAM.

Fentress D. Mayberry appeals the motion court’s denial of his Rule 24.035 motion without a hearing. Mayberry contends the motion court erred in denying his Rule 24.035 motion as untimely filed because he pleaded factual allegations that demonstrate that he made a good faith effort to file a timely motion and that the late filing of his motion was due to the circuit court’s failure to file-stamp the motion in a timely manner. Mayberry further contends the motion court erred in denying his Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing because he alleged that plea counsel failed to act as a reasonably competent attorney by misleading him to believe that Mayberry’s mother thought he should plead guilty, and therefore his guilty plea was not entered knowingly and voluntarily.

Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).