Cooper v. State
356 S.W.3d 148
| Mo. | 2011Background
- Cooper pleaded guilty to two counts of stealing property >$500 under §570.030; plea included waiver of Rule 24.035 post-conviction relief in exchange for a 15-year sentence on each count suspended, with five-year probation.
- Cooper was found a persistent offender, raising potential 15-year sentences; sentences were suspended and probation imposed.
- Cooper violated probation, probation revoked, and 15-year sentences ordered executed; Cooper then moved for post-conviction relief alleging ineffective assistance of counsel.
- Motion court denied an evidentiary hearing and overruled the amended motion on the merits; court found no coercion or prejudice from counsel.
- Court of Appeals’ opinion led to Supreme Court remand with instruction to dismiss the Rule 24.035 motion; ultimately the Supreme Court vacated and remanded to dismiss.
- Record shows extensive on-the-record questioning of Cooper about voluntary and informed plea, with waiver signed and acknowledged as knowing, voluntary, and intelligent.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether waiver of post-conviction relief was knowing and voluntary given alleged counsel conflict | Cooper argues waiver was not knowing/voluntary due to potential conflict of interest | Record shows informed, voluntary waiver; no actual adverse conflict shown | Waiver valid; no actual conflict proven; voluntary and intelligent |
| Whether defense counsel's potential conflict affects validity of plea waiver | Conflict of interest could render waiver involuntary | Conflict must be actual and adversely affect performance; not shown | No showing of actual conflict; plea waiver upheld |
| Whether advisory opinion 126 governs waiver of post-conviction rights in this context | Opinion suggests waiver of post-conviction rights is not waivable if conflict present | Opinion not controlling; record shows informed waiver; advisory opinion not binding | Advisory Opinion 126 not controlling; waiver upheld based on record |
| Standard of review for Rule 24.035 post-conviction motion on ineffective assistance claims in a guilty-plea case | IAC claims could undermine voluntariness of plea and waiver | Guilty plea waives nonjurisdictional defects; IAC claims must show effect on voluntariness | Record supports voluntariness; no prejudice shown under applicable standard |
Key Cases Cited
- Roberts v. State, 276 S.W.3d 833 (Mo. banc 2009) (Guilty plea validity and procedural posture in Rule 24.035 context)
- State v. Roll, 942 S.W.2d 370 (Mo. banc 1997) (Prejudice and Strickland standard in plea context)
- Feldhaus v. State, 311 S.W.3d 802 (Mo. banc 2010) (Plea waivers and voluntary/knowing waiver considerations)
- Jackson v. State, 241 S.W.3d 831 (Mo.App.2007) (Right to seek post-conviction relief knowingly waived in plea)
- DeRoo v. United States, 223 F.3d 919 (8th Cir. 2000) (Waiver of post-conviction relief in plea agreements; ineffective assistance exception survives waiver inquiry)
- United States v. Cockerham, 237 F.3d 1179 (10th Cir. 2001) (Plea waiver of post-conviction rights not to bar IAC challenges to validity of plea or waiver)
- Watson v. United States, 165 F.3d 486 (6th Cir.1999) (Informed and voluntary waiver of collateral attack right)