Miller v. State, 603 S.W.2d 29 (Mo. Ct. App. 1980). · Go Syfert
Search
Miller v. State, 603 S.W.2d 29 (Mo. Ct. App. 1980). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
6 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Hayes v. State (moctapp, 1988-07-29)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hayes v. State
Mo. Ct. App. · 1988 · confidence medium
Miller held that while the doctrine of laches is inapplicable to a Rule 27.26 proceeding, the lapse of time between a conviction and the filing of a 27.26 proceeding may be considered in determining the good faith and credibility of the prisoner seeking relief. 603 S.W.2d at 30 [1].
cited Cited as authority (rule) In Re Stewart
Vt. · 1981 · confidence medium
Accord, State v. Urbano, supra, 105 Ariz. at 14 , 457 P.2d at 344 ; Miller v. State, 603 S.W.2d 29, 30 (Mo. Ct. App. 1980).
cited Cited "see" Easton v. State
Mo. Ct. App. · 1989 · signal: see · confidence high
See Miller v. State, 603 S.W.2d 29 (Mo.App.1980).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Louis Hollie MILLER, Movant-Appellant
v.
STATE of Missouri
No. 11506.
Missouri Court of Appeals.
Jun 26, 1980.
603 S.W.2d 29
1980 Mo. App. LEXIS 3468
Blair Buckley, Jr., Public Defender, Ca-ruthersville, for movant-appellant., John D. Ashcroft, Atty. Gen., Jan Bond, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Billings.
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published
BILLINGS, Presiding Judge.

Appellant Louis Hollie Miller filed a Rule 27.26, V.A.M.R., motion seeking to vacate two life sentences imposed in 1952 after he had entered pleas of guilty to charges of first degree murder and first degree robbery. Following appointment of counsel and an evidentiary hearing, the Circuit Court of New Madrid County denied appellant’s motion. We affirm.

By reason of appellant’s pleas of guilty, his contentions regarding ineffective assistance of counsel are immaterial except to[*30] the extent this ground bears on the issues of voluntariness and understanding. Parks v. State, 518 S.W.2d 181 (Mo.App.1974).

The doctrine of laches is inapplicable to a Rule 27.26 postconviction proceeding but the lapse of time may be considered in determining the good faith and credibility of one seeking such relief. Rhoades v. State, 504 S.W.2d 291 (Mo.App.1973).

Appellant admitted and the trial court found that the pleas were influenced by the possibility of the death penalty being imposed. Such fear does not render the guilty pleas involuntary. Wright v. State, 549 S.W.2d 554 (Mo.App.1977).

The trial court had the right to reject appellant’s testimony of alleged derelictions of his court-appointed attorney and accept as true the attorney’s testimony. Armstrong v. State, 534 S.W.2d 547 (Mo.App.1976).

The trial court’s findings, conclusions and judgment are not clearly erroneous and the judgment is affirmed.

All concur.