Legal Opinion

DePriest v. State

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided February 28, 2017No. SC 95483, No. SC 95484PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Per curiam

David and Natalie DePriest appeal from the motion court’s judgments overruling, without evidentiary hearings, their separate Rule 24.035 motions for post-conviction relief. Both alleged they had received ineffective assistance of counsel in pleading guilty due to an actual conflict of interest arising out of trial counsel’s dual representation of the DePriests during plea negotiations and subsequent guilty pleas. In their amended motions, the DePriests separately requested evidentiary hearings. The motion court overruled each of the DePriests’ motions without evidentiary hearings. This Court…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Hill v. LockhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Glasser v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
  4. Cuyler v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. Holloway v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1978

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Booker v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 2018
  2. Ryan v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 2018
  3. Anthony Wallace v. State of MissouriMissouri Court of Appeals · 2019
  4. Harris v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 2018
  5. State v. TateMissouri Court of Appeals · 2019

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API