Rivers v. State, 498 S.W.3d 534

Movant Earon Rivers pled guilty (blind plea) to second-degree murder, first-degree robbery, and two counts of armed criminal action for a 2012 pizza-delivery robbery in which the delivery driver was shot and killed.
The State’s factual proffer tied Rivers to the crime: phone records showing a call from his phone to Imo’s, pizza boxes at his residence, a gun under his mattress with his fingerprints, and ballistic matching of the bullet to that gun. Rivers admitted role as lookout and placing the pizza order but denied shooting the victim.
At the plea hearing the court explained the statutory punishment ranges (including possible life sentences) and explicitly told Rivers the court alone would decide his sentence and would not be bound by any promises. Rivers acknowledged understanding and affirmed satisfaction with counsel.
Rivers was later sentenced to concurrent 25-year terms. After sentencing he asserted counsel had told him he would receive 18–20 years and not more than 20, and filed a Rule 24.035 motion claiming ineffective assistance induced an involuntary plea.
The motion court denied the Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing, finding the motion’s allegations were refuted by the record; Rivers appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Rivers’ guilty plea was involuntary due to counsel’s alleged promise of a 18–20 year sentence	Counsel assured Rivers he would get ≤20 years, so his plea was induced and involuntary	The plea colloquy and sentencing record show Rivers knew ranges and that the court alone decides sentence; any counsel prediction was not binding	Court held plea involuntary claim refuted by record; denied evidentiary hearing and affirmed

Weeks v. State, 140 S.W.3d 39 (Mo. banc 2004) (standard of review for denial of postconviction motion)
Dorsey v. State, 115 S.W.3d 842 (Mo. banc 2003) (when evidentiary hearing is required on postconviction claims)
Worthington v. State, 166 S.W.3d 566 (Mo. banc 2005) (ineffective assistance claim relevant only as it affects plea voluntariness)
Guynes v. State, 191 S.W.3d 80 (Mo. App. E.D. 2006) (plea record can refute involuntariness claim and preclude hearing)
Kennell v. State, 209 S.W.3d 504 (Mo. App. E.D. 2006) (misunderstanding about sentence vitiates plea only where belief was reasonable and based on contrary promise)
Krider v. State, 44 S.W.3d 850 (Mo. App. W.D. 2001) (unreasonable belief about sentence does not render plea involuntary)
Lynn v. State, 417 S.W.3d 789 (Mo. App. E.D. 2013) (disappointed expectation or erroneous counsel prediction insufficient to invalidate plea)
Gold v. State, 341 S.W.3d 177 (Mo. App. S.D. 2011) (same principle regarding counsel predictions and plea voluntariness)