Mark C. Brandolese Missouri Cases

Mark Brandolese appealed the denial of his amended motion for post-conviction relief, following convictions for domestic assault and armed criminal action. He argued that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to properly address a statutorily disqualified venireperson and for failing to peremptorily strike her. Brandolese also claimed his appellate counsel was ineffective for not challenging the exclusion of an exculpatory statement. The appellate court affirmed the denial, finding Brandolese failed to prove actual bias or prejudice from the venireperson's service, and that appellate counsel's performance was not deficient regarding the unpreserved evidentiary issue.

Mark C. Brandolese appealed the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. The motion court had denied his claims on the merits, but the appellate court found that Brandolese's appointed counsel filed an untimely amended motion, and the record did not show a ruling on counsel's request for an extension. The appellate court reversed the judgment and remanded the case, instructing the motion court to conduct an independent inquiry into whether Brandolese was abandoned by his post-conviction counsel.

Mark C. Brandolese appealed his conviction for second-degree domestic assault and armed criminal action, challenging jury instructions, evidentiary rulings, and the trial court's refusal to strike a juror for cause. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that a juror related to an assistant prosecuting attorney involved in the case was statutorily disqualified. This disqualification constituted plain error, resulting in manifest injustice.