Case Name: Dereco JENNINGS, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1995-12-12
Citations: 914 S.W.2d 810
Docket Number: No. 67852
Parties: Dereco JENNINGS, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
Judges: Before REINHARD, P.J., and KAROHL and DOWD, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 914
Pages: 810–811

Head Matter:
Dereco JENNINGS, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
No. 67852.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Dec. 12, 1995.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Feb. 7, 1996.
Dave Hemingway, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for movant/appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, Joanne E. Beal, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, for respondeni/respon-dent.
Before REINHARD, P.J., and KAROHL and DOWD, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Movant appeals the denial, without an evi-dentiary hearing, of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. The state concedes the necessity of an evidentiary hearing on the issue of whether movant was misinformed about his sentence. Thus, we reverse and remand. We affirm in all other respects.
Little discussion is required in light of the state's concession. There is no reason to limit the evidentiary hearing as the state requests because the allegation on this issue in movant's pro se motion was not limited to only one count of the plea. We have examined movant's other points and conclude that an evidentiary hearing is not required on those claims of error.
Affirmed in part; reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing in part,