From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Forbeck v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.
Nov 10, 2015
475 S.W.3d 213 (E.D. Mo. 2015)

Opinion

No. ED 102484

11-10-2015

Christopher Douglas Forbeck, Movant/Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.

Lisa M. Stroup, Missouri Public Defender Office, St. Louis, for Appellant. Rachel S. Flaster, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, for Respondent.


Lisa M. Stroup, Missouri Public Defender Office, St. Louis, for Appellant.

Rachel S. Flaster, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM

ORDER

Christopher Forbeck (Movant) appeals the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for postconviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. Movant contends that the motion court clearly erred by denying his post-conviction motion because he established that plea counsel was ineffective. Specifically, Movant argues that plea counsel was ineffective for (1) not explaining to Movant that failing to pay restitution on time would cause his probation to be revoked and (2) not explaining that Movant could not hunt with firearms during probation.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find that the motion court did not clearly err in denying post-conviction relief. 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. Rule 84.16(b).


Summaries of

Forbeck v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.
Nov 10, 2015
475 S.W.3d 213 (E.D. Mo. 2015)
Case details for

Forbeck v. State

Case Details

Full title:Christopher Douglas Forbeck, Movant/Appellant, v. State of Missouri…

Court:Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.

Date published: Nov 10, 2015

Citations

475 S.W.3d 213 (E.D. Mo. 2015)