5 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 2005–2020 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Missouri courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Fultsgreen1 sentence2011See State v. Fults, 719 S.W.2d 46, 48-49 (Mo. App.1986). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Sappgreen1 sentence2006He had committed a probation violation, and I believe there was a warrant issued for the violation of probation.” (Emphasis added.) From this, the appellant, citing State v. Sapp, 55 S.W.3d 382, 383 (Mo.App.2001), contends that the State did not make a submissible case in that it is well settled that a probation violation is not a crime in any context. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Chavezgreen1 sentence2005See State v. Chavez, 128 S.W.3d 569, 577 (Mo.App. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State of Missouri v. Amanda N. Bazell
green
1 sentence2020On April 8, 2019, Appellant timely filed an amended motion alleging (1) he was denied due process of law because his stealing offense was a misdemeanor under State v. Bazell, 497 S.W.3d 263 (Mo. 2016), and his five-year sentence exceeded the authorized punishment; (2) plea counsel was ineffective for failing to move to dismiss the felony charge and failing to advise Appellant that he was charged only with a misdemeanor; and (3) probation revocation counsel was ineffective for failing to argue the conviction should be amended to a misdemeanor and Appellant should be sentenced to no more than on | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Johnson v. State
green
1 sentence2010In support, the State notes that in Johnson v. State, 938 S.W.2d 264 (Mo. banc 1997), this Court looked to the transcript of the sentencing hearing as a whole to determine whether the defendant had been sentenced as a persistent offender. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.