Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Briley v. State

Court of Appeals of Missouri, Eastern District, Fourth Division

June 23, 2015

LONNIE BRILEY, Appellant,
v.
STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent

Appeal from the Circuit Court of St. Francois County

Jessica Hathaway, Assistant Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.

Rachel S. Flaster, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.

Patricia L. Cohen, Presiding Judge. Roy L. Richter, J., and Robert M. Clayton III, J., concur.

OPINION

Patricia L. Cohen, Presiding Judge

Introduction

Lonnie Briley (Movant) appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Francois County denying without an evidentiary hearing his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. Movant claims the motion court clearly erred in denying his claim that plea counsel provided ineffective assistance by misinforming and failing to explain to him the meaning of the terms " consecutive" and " concurrent." We affirm.

Factual and Procedural Background

On October 3, 2012 Movant pleaded guilty in two cases. In the first case, the State charged Movant with tampering in the first degree and misdemeanor stealing. In the second case, the State charged Movant with burglary in the second degree.

At the plea hearing,[1] the trial court reviewed the essential elements and ranges of punishment of each of the charged offenses. Movant affirmed that he understood that the range of punishment for first-degree tampering and second-degree burglary was " up to seven years in the state Department of Corrections or a county jail term of up to one year or a fine of up to $5,000.00 or a combination of fine and confinement." The prosecutor announced that the parties had entered a plea bargain agreement, pursuant to which the State was recommending that the plea court sentence Movant to seven years' imprisonment for tampering and thirty days' jail time for stealing in the first case, with suspended execution of sentence and five years' supervised probation. As to the second case, the State recommended " also a sentence of seven years to the Department of Corrections to run consecutive to the sentence in the other case, and five years' supervised probation."

After the plea court found that Movant entered his pleas of guilty voluntarily and intelligently and accepted his pleas, the plea court announced Movant's sentence as follows:

[The first case], Count I, it is the sentence, judgment, and order of the Court that the defendant be confined to the State Department of Corrections for a period of seven years for the class C felony of tampering in the first degree.
Court orders that the execution of that sentence be suspended and places the defendant on five years['] supervised probation with the State Board of Probation and Parole.
As to Count II, the Court sentences the defendant to thirty days in the county jail with credit for time served. It is my understanding he has enough time to meet that, so no additional time is to be served.
In [the second case], it is the sentence, judgment, and order of the Court that he be confined to the State Department of Corrections for a period of seven years for the class C felony of burglary in the second degree.
This sentence is to run consecutive to the seven years imposed [the first case], for a total sentence of fourteen years to ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.