Fiorella v. State

347 S.W.3d 183, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1144, 2011 WL 3889162
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 6, 2011·No. WD 72351·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Order

Per Curiam:

This is a Rule 29.15 case. The issue is whether the movant’s right to a competent attorney was violated by virtue of his trial counsel’s alleged failure to investigate whether the police prematurely deemed his request for an attorney abandoned after they had requested that he take a breath test. For reasons stated in the memorandum provided to the parties, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Fiorella v. State, 347 S.W.3d 183, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1144, 2011 WL 3889162 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

347 S.W.3d 183 (Fiorella v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. McCauley
347 S.W.3d 183 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2011)