DANIEL LEE PHERIGO, Movant-Respondent v. STATE OF MISSOURI
Missouri Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtGary W. Lynch, J.
— Opinion author
The State of Missouri appeals the motion court’s judgment granting Daniel Lee Pherigo’s (“Movant”) Rule 29.15 1 motion for post-conviction relief finding that IVEov-ant received ineffective assistance of counsel. The State claims the motion court clearly erred in finding Movant’s trial counsel was ineffective:' (1) for failing to request a continuance in response to the State’s late disclosure on the morning of trial of two recorded interviews of Mov-ant, a supplemental report pertaining to those interviews, and recorded interviews of three of Movant’s co-defendants, because…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Kyles v. WhitleySupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Zink v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 2009
- Charles K. Moore v. State of MissouriSupreme Court of Missouri · 2015
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.