From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lumzy v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
May 16, 2006
191 S.W.3d 683 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006)

Opinion

No. ED 86555.

May 16, 2006.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Carolyn C. Whittington, Judge.

Jessica Hathaway, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Robert J. Bartholomew, Jr., Asst. Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.

Before NANNETTE A. BAKER, P.J., and ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., and SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, JJ.


ORDER


Movant, Jeffrey Lumzy, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, movant argues that his counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to inform him that he would have to serve eighty percent of his sentence before being eligible for parole.

The motion court's findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).


Summaries of

Lumzy v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
May 16, 2006
191 S.W.3d 683 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006)
Case details for

Lumzy v. State

Case Details

Full title:Jeffrey LUMZY, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent

Court:Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District

Date published: May 16, 2006

Citations

191 S.W.3d 683 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006)