Case ID: sw3d_565/html/0200-01.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

Preston S. HARLOW, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    No. ED 106472
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION THREE.
    Filed: October 16, 2018 Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied November 14, 2018 Application for Transfer to Supreme Court Denied January 29, 2019
    FOR APPELLANTS: Lisa M. Stroup, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, Saint Louis, Missouri 65102.
    FOR RESPONDENTS: Shaun J. Mackelprang, Joshua Hawley, 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

Preston Harlow appeals the denial without an evidentiary hearing of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. Harlow claims that the motion court clearly erred because his conviction of the class C felony of stealing and sentence of seven 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 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).