Small v. State
Decision Date | 01 February 1983 |
Docket Number | No. 44886,44886 |
Citation | 646 S.W.2d 903 |
Parties | Lawrence SMALL, Movant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent. |
Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
I.I. Lamke, Washington, for movant.
John Ashcroft, Atty. Gen., Kristie Green, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, Walter Murray, Jr., Pros. Atty., Union, for respondent.
Movant appeals from the trial court's denial of his Rule 27.26 motion without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.
Movant was charged with one count of statutory rape, a violation of § 559.260, RSMo. 1969, and an unspecified companion charge. On April 9, 1980, he entered an Alford plea of guilty to the offense of statutory rape and the state dismissed the other charge. On May 20, 1980, the court sentenced movant to fifteen years with the Department of Corrections.
In movant's amended motion, he alleges that his plea was involuntary because his attorney erroneously led him to believe an Alford 1 plea "to be a lesser guilty plea and at no time believed it to be a complete guilty plea." He also alleged his attorney provided ineffective assistance because he failed to file a motion to withdraw the guilty plea.
The trial court filed findings of fact and conclusions of law and denied movant's motion, without an evidentiary hearing. Our review is limited to a determination of whether the findings, conclusions and judgment are clearly erroneous. Jenkins v. State, 637 S.W.2d 808, 809 (Mo.App.1982); Rule 27.26(j). Movant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing if the motion alleges facts, not conclusions, which are not refuted by the files and records in the case and which, if true, entitle him to relief. Kearns v. State, 583 S.W.2d 748, 750 (Mo.App.1979).
On the morning of trial, movant's attorney stated that his client wished to withdraw his plea of not guilty and enter an Alford plea of guilty. The following conversation between the judge and movant occurred:
Later, the following colloquy took place:
Defendant contends he was misled as to the nature of the plea he entered. His allegation, though, must be tested by whether his belief, by which he claims to have been misled, was reasonable. Chapman v. State, 641 S.W.2d 428, 429 (Mo.App.1982). Otherwise, as the Supreme Court stated in McMahon v. State, 569 S.W.2d 753, 758 (Mo. banc 1978):
[T]he granting of every 27.26 motion would be automatic upon the movant's assertion that his guilty plea resulted from a subjectively mistaken belief. The test to be applied must be viewed in the light of the reasonableness of the claimed belief. Where there is no reasonable basis for the belief in light of the guilty plea record, movant is not entitled to relief.
In the present case, movant did not expressly admit that he committed the offense. Indeed, according to his attorney, movant considered himself innocent. A plea of guilty, however, may be knowingly and voluntarily entered even though the accused does not make an express admission of guilt. Howard v. State, 627 S.W.2d 643, 645 (Mo.App.1981). Moreover, even if the accused maintains his innocence so long as the plea of guilty represents a voluntary choice of alternatives available to him at the time, according to his conception of his own best interests it is not involuntary. Robinson v. State, 482 S.W.2d 492, 494-95 (Mo.1972); Hayes v. State, 501 S.W.2d 508, 512 (Mo.App.1973).
Missouri courts have held an Alford plea of guilty to be a voluntary plea of guilty. Bounds v. State, 556 S.W.2d 497 (Mo.App.1977). See Lewis v. State, 539 S.W.2d 578 (Mo.App.1976) ( ).
Neither the trial judge's nor his...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Pippenger v. State, 17012
...available to him at the time, according to his own best interests." Turner v. State, 755 S.W.2d 409, 410 (Mo.App.1988); Small v. State, 646 S.W.2d 903, 905 (Mo.App.1983). The record here clearly refutes movant's claim that his plea was equivocal; that there was no factual basis for the plea......
-
Turner v. State, 53757
...a guilty plea may be voluntarily entered even though the accused does not make an express admission of guilt. Small v. State, 646 S.W.2d 903, 905 (Mo.App., E.D.1983). A guilty plea is not involuntary, even though the accused maintains his innocence, so long as the plea represents a voluntar......
-
Walker v. State
...to show that his pleas were not knowingly and voluntarily entered. Movant has failed to carry his burden of proof. Small v. State, 646 S.W.2d 903, 905 (Mo.App.1983). In the hearing conducted relative to movant's guilty pleas, the trial court developed, from movant's testimony, that movant w......
-
Bibbs v. State
...of alternatives available to him, according to his conception of his own best interests, it is not involuntary. Small v. State , 646 S.W.2d 903, 905 (Mo. App. E.D. 1983). When given the opportunity to clarify his statement there was "nothing forcible" about it, Movant agreed with the trial ......