Court of Appeals of Missouri, Southern District, First Division
MELVIN M. MOSLEY, Movant/Appellant,
STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent/Respondent
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF GREENE COUNTY. Honorable Calvin R. Holden, Circuit Judge.
For Appellant: Donald B. Harmening, of Springfield, Missouri.
For Respondent: Chris Koster, Attorney General and Karen L. Kramer, Assistant Attorney General, of Jefferson City, Missouri.
WILLIAM W. FRANCIS, JR., C.J./P.J. - OPINION AUTHOR. JEFFREY W. BATES, J. - Concurs. DANIEL E. SCOTT, J. - Concurs.
WILLIAM W. FRANCIS, JR., C.J./P.J.
Melvin M. Mosley (" Mosley" ) appeals the motion court's denial of his Rule 24.035 motion, following an evidentiary hearing, arguing that the motion court clearly erred in denying his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. We affirm the judgment of the motion court.
Facts and Procedural Background
We set forth only those facts necessary to complete our review. In doing so, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the motion court's judgment. McCauley v. State, 380 S.W.3d 657, 659 (Mo.App. S.D. 2012).
Mosley was charged by information with the class A felony of robbery in the first degree, in violation of section 569.020. Mosley entered into a plea agreement with the State whereby Mosley pled guilty in exchange for a 12-year sentence. At the plea hearing, in response to questions from the trial judge, Mosley expressed no dissatisfaction with his attorney, and no promises or threats for his plea. Mosley confirmed that he signed the plea agreement, everything was truthful in the document, and that the plea agreement contained all the promises made to him in exchange for his plea of guilty including the State's opposition to probation. He stated that he was pleading guilty because he committed the acts as alleged by the State. The trial court advised that the range of punishment for the crime to which Mosley would be pleading guilty was 10 to 30 years in the Missouri Department of Corrections (" DOC" ), and that Mosley had the right to be tried by a jury. Mosley said he understood.
At the sentencing hearing, Mosley's counsel requested probation and advised the court that Mosley would be open to enrollment in an anger treatment program, or in the alternative, " a 120 be given . . . for ITC." Defense counsel also argued that " this is an 85 percent crime, so if you were to sentence him to any DOC time, he'd have to do 85 percent of that[.]" The court sentenced Mosley to 12 years in the DOC.
The court then questioned Mosley again regarding his representation by defense counsel. Mosley requested that defense counsel leave the courtroom, and then told the court he was dissatisfied with his counsel's representation in that Mosley did not want to waive his preliminary hearing, and defense counsel promised him probation. The court asked Mosley if he understood that at the time he signed the plea agreement, and the State opposed probation, that it became the court's decision as to whether probation would be ordered. Mosley indicated that was what he understood. The court then asked Mosley if he had any other complaints about ...