Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

209 S.W.3d 21

John v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided December 5, 2006

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 2006-12-05

Decided 2006-12-05

¶1ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2Jesse St. John (“Movant”) appeals from the motion court’s judgment denying his *22Rule 24.035 post-conviction motion after an evidentiary hearing. Movant contends that his guilty .plea was not knowing or voluntary because: (1) he was pressured by his mother to plead guilty and. (2) his lawyer misadvised him with respect to the “legal differences” between- statutory rape and forcible rape. We affirm.

¶3We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court’s decision was not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.

¶4We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

/209/sw3d/21 · .json · Public domain