Larry E. Johnson v. State of Missouri
2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 1298
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Larry E. Johnson pleaded guilty (Jan. 11, 2012) to class B felony DWI as a chronic offender and was sentenced to six years’ imprisonment.
- At the plea colloquy Johnson acknowledged understanding the charge, the 5–15 year sentencing range, and that no promises about parole or a particular sentence had been made.
- Johnson later filed a Rule 24.035 motion alleging plea counsel was ineffective for failing to inform him that § 558.019.2(1) requires serving 40% of a sentence before parole eligibility.
- At the evidentiary hearing the court received Johnson’s deposition; the court found Johnson not credible and relied on his plea colloquy statements.
- The circuit court denied relief; Johnson appealed arguing counsel’s omission rendered his plea involuntary and prejudiced him.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plea counsel was ineffective for not informing Johnson of the 40% parole-eligibility minimum | Johnson: counsel failed to advise him of mandatory 40% minimum; he would have insisted on trial | State: parole eligibility and related mandatory-minimum parole rules are collateral; counsel had no constitutional duty to advise; plea colloquy shows Johnson knew consequences | Court: Counsel was not ineffective; failure to advise about parole-minimum did not render plea unknowing or involuntary; denial of Rule 24.035 affirmed |
| Whether Padilla requires advising on parole consequences or mandatory minimums | Johnson: Padilla expands duty to inform about clear, severe consequences and should apply here | State: Padilla applies to unique deportation consequences; Missouri precedent has declined to extend Padilla to parole matters | Court: Declined to expand Padilla to parole/mandatory-minimum parole consequences and followed existing Missouri precedent |
Key Cases Cited
- Reynolds v. State, 994 S.W.2d 944 (Mo. banc 1999) (plea counsel not constitutionally required to advise defendant about parole consequences)
- Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010) (counsel must advise about immigration consequences when clear; deportation is a unique, severe consequence)
- Webb v. State, 334 S.W.3d 126 (Mo. banc 2011) (distinguishes misinformation from omission; misadvice may warrant an evidentiary hearing)
- Simmons v. State, 432 S.W.3d 306 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014) (reaffirmed that parole eligibility is collateral and counsel need not advise about it)
- Worthington v. State, 166 S.W.3d 566 (Mo. banc 2005) (by pleading guilty, defendant waives ineffective-assistance claims except to the extent they affect voluntariness of the plea)