357 S.W.3d 300
Mo. Ct. App.2012Background
- Stacker pleaded guilty to five charged offenses on July 29, 2008; there was no plea agreement.
- During the plea, Stacker stated he understood the charges, waived certain rights, and was satisfied with his attorney.
- On November 7, 2008, the court sentenced Stacker to concurrent multi-role terms totaling up to 30 years in prison.
- Stacker did not appeal his convictions or sentences.
- On December 23, 2008, Stacker filed a pro se Rule 24.085 motion for post-conviction relief, later amended to allege plea counsel was ineffective for not filing a suppression motion.
- An evidentiary hearing was held April 20, 2010, with Stacker as the only witness; the motion court denied relief on May 24, 2010.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Stacker showed prejudice from plea counsel’s alleged ineffectiveness. | Stacker contends he was prejudiced because a suppression motion could have excluded evidence. | State argues no prejudice since there was no evidence he would have went to trial if suppressed. | Prejudice not shown; failure to demonstrate a reasonable probability of going to trial bars relief. |
| Whether the guilty pleas were knowing and voluntary. | Stacker claims he did not understand the motion to suppress was part of the guilty plea. | The plea colloquy showed understanding and waivers; the court could reject the unknowing-plea claim. | Plea was knowing and voluntary; credibility resolved in favor of the plea record. |
Key Cases Cited
- Welch v. State, 326 S.W.3d 916 (Mo.App. W.D.2010) (plea-counsel ineffectiveness standard in guilty-plea cases)
- Chaney v. State, 223 S.W.3d 200 (Mo.App. S.D.2007) (two-prong Strickland test applied to post-conviction claims)
- Beach v. State, 220 S.W.3d 360 (Mo.App. S.D.2007) (prejudice prong governs; probability of trial depends on evidence of trial decision)
- Moss v. State, 10 S.W.3d 508 (Mo. banc 2000) (Strickland prejudice standard in plea context; confidence in outcome governs)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (establishes performance and prejudice prongs)
- Archer v. State, 931 S.W.2d 473 (Mo.App. S.D.1996) (post-conviction burden and standard of review)
- Worthington v. State, 166 S.W.3d 566 (Mo. banc 2005) (banc standard on plea-related claims)
- Conley v. State, 301 S.W.3d 84 (Mo.App. S.D.2010) (motion court findings reviewed for clear error)
- Mendez v. State, 180 S.W.3d 75 (Mo.App. S.D.2005) (credibility determinations defer to motion court)