Case Name: Michael L. SANDERS, Appellant, v. State of MISSOURI, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2014-10-14
Citations: 445 S.W.3d 681
Docket Number: No. ED 101030
Parties: Michael L. SANDERS, Appellant, v. State of MISSOURI, Respondent.
Judges: Before: KURT S. ODENWALD, P.J., ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J., and GARY M. GAERTNER, JR., J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 445
Pages: 681–682

Head Matter:
Michael L. SANDERS, Appellant, v. State of MISSOURI, Respondent.
No. ED 101030.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division III.
Oct. 14, 2014.
Amy Faerber, Assistant Public Defender, Office of the Missouri Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Chris Foster, Attorney General, Karen Kramer, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before: KURT S. ODENWALD, P.J., ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J., and GARY M. GAERTNER, JR., J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Appellant Michael Sanders ("Sanders") appeals from the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 24.085 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentia-ry hearing. Smith claims that the motion court clearly erred in denying his motion because he pleaded facts not refuted by the record that entitle him to relief in that plea counsel's representation to him that she received the sentence she requested in 90% of her cases was not simply a prediction, but rather was coercive and rendered his plea involuntary.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment of the motion court pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). .