outcome of plain error (Missouri) · Go Syfert
← Missouri issues

outcome of plain error in Missouri

28 Missouri opinions name it 1 courts 2004–2015 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.

Followed or applied (17)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Ropergreen
moctapp · 2004 · cited in 13 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2006–2014
2 sentences

2014The outcome of plain error review “depends heavily on the specific facts and circumstances of each case.” Roper, 136 S.W.3d at 900 .

2014The outcome of plain error review, furthermore, “depends heavily on the specific facts and circumstances of each case.” State v. Roper, 136 S.W.3d 891, 900 (Mo. App. 2004).

713
State v. Raygreen
moctapp · 2013 · cited in 3 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2014–2015
2 sentences

2015Id. at 726-27 (quoting State v. Ray, 407 S.W.3d 162, 170 (Mo. App. E.D. 2013)).

2014State v. Ray, 407 S.W.3d 162, 170 (Mo.App.E.D.2013) (internal citations and quotations omitted).

33
State v. Ralstongreen
moctapp · 2013 · cited in 3 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2013–2015
2 sentences

2015State v. Ralston, 400 S.W.3d 511, 520 (Mo. App.2013).

2013“The outcome of plain error review, furthermore, depends heavily on the specific facts and circumstances of each case.” Ralston, 400 S.W.3d at 520 (quoting Dean, 382 S.W.3d at 224 ).

23
State v. Fickegreen
moctapp · 1995 · cited in 2 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2007–2007
2 sentences

2007State v. Roper, 136 S.W.3d 891, 900 (Mo.App.2004); State v. Ficke, 892 S.W.2d 814, 817 (Mo.App.1995).

2007State v. Roper, 136 S.W.3d 891, 900 (Mo.App.2004); State v. Ficke, 892 S.W.2d 814, 817 (Mo.App.1995).

22
State v. Sidebottomgreen
mo · 1988 · cited in 2 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2006–2007
2 sentences

2007“This is because ‘alleged errors committed in closing argument do not justify relief under the plain error rule unless they are determined to have a decisive effect on the jury.’ ” Vaughn, 32 S.W.3d at 800 (quoting State v. Sidebottom, 753 S.W.2d 915, 920 (Mo. banc 1988)).

2006This is because “alleged errors committed in closing argument do not justify relief under the plain error rule unless they are determined to have a decisive effect on the jury.” State v. Sidebottom, 753 S.W.2d 915, 920 (Mo. banc 1988).

22
State v. Kempkergreen
mo · 1992 · cited in 2 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2006–2007
2 sentences

2007“The outcome of plain error review depends heavily on the specific facts and circumstances of each case.” Id. “ ‘Plain error will seldom be found in unobjected closing argument.’” State v. Vaughn, 32 S.W.3d 798, 800 (Mo.App.2000) (quoting State v. Kempker, 824 S.W.2d 909, 911 (Mo. banc 1992)).

2006“The outcome of plain error review depends heavily on the specific facts and circumstances of each case.” Id. “[P]lain error will seldom be found in unobjected closing argument.” State v. Kempker, 824 S.W.2d 909, 911 (Mo. banc 1992).

22
State v. Williamsgreen
moctapp · 1999 · cited in 2 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2004–2013
2 sentences

2013“The outcome of plain error review depends heavily on the specific facts and circumstances of each case.” Id. (citing Williams, 9 S.W.3d at 12 ).

2013“The outcome of plain error review depends heavily on the specific facts and circumstances of each case.” Id. (citing Williams, 9 S.W.3d at 12 ).

12
State v. Deangreen
moctapp · 2012 · cited in 2 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
2 sentences

2013“The outcome of plain error review, furthermore, depends heavily on the specific facts and circumstances of each case.” Ralston, 400 S.W.3d at 520 (quoting Dean, 382 S.W.3d at 224 ).

2013To reiterate, the outcome of plain error review “depends heavily on the specific facts and circumstances of each case.” Dean, 382 S.W.3d at 224 .

12
State v. Thomasgreen
moctapp · 2002 · cited in 1 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
2 sentences

2009“The outcome of plain error review depends heavily on the specific facts and circumstances of each case.” Id. “ ‘Instructional error seldom constitutes plain error, which requires a defendant to demonstrate more than mere prejudice.’ ” State v. Darden, 263 S.W.3d 760, 763 (Mo.App.2008) (quoting State v. Thomas, 75 S.W.3d 788, 791 (Mo.App. 2002)). “ ‘For instructional error to rise to the level of plain error, the trial court must have so misdirected or failed to instruct the jury that it is apparent to the appellate court that the instructional error affected the jury’s verdict.’ ” Id. “ ‘In d

2009“The outcome of plain error review depends heavily on the specific facts and circumstances of each case.” Id. “ ‘Instructional error seldom constitutes plain error, which requires a defendant to demonstrate more than mere prejudice.’ ” State v. Darden, 263 S.W.3d 760, 763 (Mo.App.2008) (quoting State v. Thomas, 75 S.W.3d 788, 791 (Mo.App. 2002)). “ ‘For instructional error to rise to the level of plain error, the trial court must have so misdirected or failed to instruct the jury that it is apparent to the appellate court that the instructional error affected the jury’s verdict.’ ” Id. “ ‘In d

11
State v. Dardengreen
moctapp · 2008 · cited in 1 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
1 sentence

2009“The outcome of plain error review depends heavily on the specific facts and circumstances of each case.” Id. “ ‘Instructional error seldom constitutes plain error, which requires a defendant to demonstrate more than mere prejudice.’ ” State v. Darden, 263 S.W.3d 760, 763 (Mo.App.2008) (quoting State v. Thomas, 75 S.W.3d 788, 791 (Mo.App. 2002)). “ ‘For instructional error to rise to the level of plain error, the trial court must have so misdirected or failed to instruct the jury that it is apparent to the appellate court that the instructional error affected the jury’s verdict.’ ” Id. “ ‘In d

11
State v. Ukagreen
moctapp · 2000 · cited in 1 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
1 sentence

2009“Trial courts retain broad discretion over issues of relevancy and admissibility of evidence, and we will not interfere with those decisions unless there is a clear showing of abuse of discretion.” State v. Uka, 25 S.W.3d 624, 627 (Mo.App.2000).

11
State v. Comtegreen
moctapp · 2004 · cited in 1 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
1 sentence

2008“When guilt is established by overwhelming evidence, no injustice or miscarriage of justice results requiring relief under the rule.” State v. Comte, 141 S.W.3d 89, 94 (Mo.App.2004).

11
State v. Skippergreen
moctapp · 2003 · cited in 1 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
1 sentence

2008“The outcome of plain error review depends heavily on the specific facts and circumstances of each case.” Id. ‘“Review of jury instructions for plain error is discretionary.’ ” State v. Skipper, 101 S.W.3d 350, 355 (Mo.App.2003) (quoting State v. Johnson, 95 S.W.3d 221, 225 (Mo.App.2003)).

11
State v. Johnsongreen
moctapp · 2003 · cited in 1 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
1 sentence

2008“The outcome of plain error review depends heavily on the specific facts and circumstances of each case.” Id. ‘“Review of jury instructions for plain error is discretionary.’ ” State v. Skipper, 101 S.W.3d 350, 355 (Mo.App.2003) (quoting State v. Johnson, 95 S.W.3d 221, 225 (Mo.App.2003)).

11
State v. Collinsgreen
moctapp · 2004 · cited in 1 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
1 sentence

2008“Our review for plain error of a trial court’s failure to sua sponte declare a mistrial is extremely limited.” State v. Collins, 150 S.W.3d 340, 349 (Mo.App.2004).

11
State v. Luegreen
moctapp · 1980 · cited in 1 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2007–2007
1 sentence

2007In support of his assertion that we should review this point for plain error, Appellant cites to State v. Lue, 594 S.W.2d 351, 354 (Mo.App.1980).

11
State v. Vaughngreen
moctapp · 2000 · cited in 1 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2007–2007
2 sentences

2007“The outcome of plain error review depends heavily on the specific facts and circumstances of each case.” Id. “ ‘Plain error will seldom be found in unobjected closing argument.’” State v. Vaughn, 32 S.W.3d 798, 800 (Mo.App.2000) (quoting State v. Kempker, 824 S.W.2d 909, 911 (Mo. banc 1992)).

2007“This is because ‘alleged errors committed in closing argument do not justify relief under the plain error rule unless they are determined to have a decisive effect on the jury.’ ” Vaughn, 32 S.W.3d at 800 (quoting State v. Sidebottom, 753 S.W.2d 915, 920 (Mo. banc 1988)).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Scurlock green
moctapp · 1999
2 sentences

2012“The outcome of plain error review depends heavily on the specific facts and circumstances of each case.” Id.

2008“The outcome of plain error review depends heavily on the specific facts and circumstances of each case.” Id.

72006–2012
State v. Taylor green
mo · 2009
1 sentence

2015Id. at 726-27 (quoting State v. Ray, 407 S.W.3d 162, 170 (Mo. App. E.D. 2013)).

12015–2015

Statutes the citing opinions construe

MO § Mo. Rev. Stat. § 566.062 (9) MO § Mo. Rev. Stat. § 491.075 (7) MO § Mo. Rev. Stat. § 566.032 (6) MO § Mo. Rev. Stat. § 565.020 (4) MO § Mo. Rev. Stat. § 566.010 (4) MO § Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.015 (4) MO § Mo. Rev. Stat. § 491.680 (3) MO § Mo. Rev. Stat. § 565.002 (3) MO § Mo. Rev. Stat. § 565.050 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check