M.K. writing from Missouri
“In my case, it appears the courts ignore the law...I have suffered many manifest injustices. Not just one. My whole case has been fundamentally unfair and [unjust]... Several Attorneys have told me if it were any other type of offense besides a sex offense it would have been overturned, reversed and vacated years ago.”
Location
Clinton County, MO
Crime of Conviction
Forcible Sodomy
Year of Conviction
1992
M.K. was sentenced to life imprisonment with the possibility of parole. M.K. was indicted on seven counts but acquitted of six. He believes that police intimidated and coerced witnesses into making statements against him, and that the prosecution withheld exculpatory forensic evidence.
The jury verdict-direction instruction in M.K.’s case varied significantly from the charges for which he was indicted. The appellate court recognized this error, but upheld the conviction because his appellate counsel failed to raise the issue on direct appeal. M.K. believes the variance between the offense of indictment and the offense of conviction amount to manifest injustice.
M.K. has been denied parole six times, despite good behavior. The parole board says that M.K.’s parole denials are based on the seriousness of the offense, for which he has already served 24 years, rather than an assessment of M.K.’s rehabilitation.
Procedural issues
In addition to the failure to raise variance on direct appeal, M.K. believes his appellate counsel had an undisclosed conflict of interest. He hopes to pursue a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
Counsel
No