Turley v. State

I dissent. Although I did originally agree with McCrary and Gamache, I am now of the opinion that they are erroneous because they were decided contrary to the language and intent of Rule 27.26(b)(3). For the same reasons that I believe these cases should no longer be followed, I would hold that appellant is entitled to raise his claim of error in a Rule 27.26 motion.

I have two basic problems with the McCrary decision. First, McCrary relies on federal case law which addressed federalism questions and is inapplicable to wholly internal state proceedings such as our Rule 27.26 post conviction…