Ott Law Firm Agent-Safe Plain Text
Official source remains authoritative.

Case: Marvin Harmon, Movant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
Decision Date: Unknown
Outcome: affirmed
Practice Area: criminal-law
Canonical URL: https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/marvin-harmon-movant-v-state-of-missouri-respondent-13200
Official Source URL: https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=13200
Related Practice Areas:
- Criminal Law: https://ott.law/practice-areas/criminal-law?ott_archive=missouri-courts&ott_archive_practice_area=criminal-law&ott_archive_query=Marvin+Harmon%2C+Movant%2C+v.+State+of+Missouri%2C+Respondent&ott_archive_link_source=tag&ott_archive_link_score=26&ott_archive_link_evidence=tag%3A+criminal-law%3B+text%3A+state+of+missouri&ott_archive_location=opinion_plain_text_practice_area (slug: criminal-law; source: tag; score: 26; evidence: tag: criminal-law, text: state of missouri, text: conviction)

---
## Syllabus

This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.
Opinion
Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District
Case Style:  Marvin Harmon, Movant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent
Case Number:  72791
Handdown Date:  06/02/1998
Appeal From:  Circuit Court of the City St. Louis, Hon. Julian L. Bush
Counsel for Appellant:  Dave Hemingway
Counsel for Respondent:  Barbara K. Chesser
Opinion Summary: 
None
Citation: 
Opinion Author:  PER CURIAM
Opinion Vote:  AFFIRMED.  Dowd, Jr., P.J., Simon and Hoff, J.J.
Opinion:
O R D E R

---

## PER CURIAM

Marvin Harmon (Movant) appeals from the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for post conviction relief without an 
evidentiary hearing.  Movant argues the motion court erred in denying him an evidentiary hearing because his trial 
counsel was ineffective in:  (1) mistakenly advising Movant that if he pled guilty he would not be subjected to either an 85 
percent minimum prison term or sex offender registration; and (2) failing to pursue a mental evaluation which would have 
shown Movant was not mentally fit to plead guilty and waive his right to trial. 
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to 
be without merit.  The motion court's findings of fact are not clearly erroneous.  An extended opinion reciting the detailed 
facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value.  Judgment affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Separate Opinion:
None
This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.