12 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1923–1994 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. Mayfieldgreen1 sentence1994The courts in some of these cases have stated that “the sight of deadly weapons or of cruel injuries tends to overwhelm reason and to associate the accused with the atrocity without sufficient evidence.” State v. Fristoe, 620 S.W.2d 421, 427 (Mo.App.1981); State v. Mayfield, 506 S.W.2d 363, 365 (Mo.1974). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Fristoegreen1 sentence1994The courts in some of these cases have stated that “the sight of deadly weapons or of cruel injuries tends to overwhelm reason and to associate the accused with the atrocity without sufficient evidence.” State v. Fristoe, 620 S.W.2d 421, 427 (Mo.App.1981); State v. Mayfield, 506 S.W.2d 363, 365 (Mo.1974). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Blankenshipgreen1 sentence1993See State v. Ervin, 835 S.W.2d 905, 924 (Mo. banc 1992); State v. Blankenship, 830 S.W.2d 1, 13 (Mo. banc 1992). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Ervingreen1 sentence1993See State v. Ervin, 835 S.W.2d 905, 924 (Mo. banc 1992); State v. Blankenship, 830 S.W.2d 1, 13 (Mo. banc 1992). | 1 | 1 |
Crudup v. Missouri State Division of Family Servicesgreen1 sentence1988See, Crudup v. Missouri State Division of Family Services, 600 S.W.2d at 130 . | 1 | 1 |
Detling v. Edelbrockgreen1 sentence1987Contrary to the assertions of the Calli-coats, this point is decided squarely by the rules announced in the cases of Detling v. Edelbrock, 671 S.W.2d 265, 272 (Mo. banc 1984); Pointer v. Edward L. | 1 | 1 |
Birmingham v. Coengreen1 sentence1970Olsten v. Susman, Mo., 391 S.W.2d 328, 330 [3]; Birmingham v. Coen, Mo., 320 S.W.2d 509, 510 [2], With respect to the charged error in permitting the two statutes to be read, the courts have held it improper to read law to the jury but have not ordered reversals on that ground. | 1 | 1 |
Olsten v. Susmangreen1 sentence1970Olsten v. Susman, Mo., 391 S.W.2d 328, 330 [3]; Birmingham v. Coen, Mo., 320 S.W.2d 509, 510 [2], With respect to the charged error in permitting the two statutes to be read, the courts have held it improper to read law to the jury but have not ordered reversals on that ground. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Martin v. Mid-America Farm Lines, Inc.
green
1 sentence1992Further the [ALJ] erred in discounting or ignoring the employer’s evaluating physician’s rating and allowing, if applicable, interest based on Martin v. Mid-America Farm Lines, Inc., 769 S.W.2d 105 (Mo. banc 1989). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
State v. Harris
green
1 sentence1983Noting that this charged error was not preserved for review upon failure to raise the issue in the motion for new trial, *63 Harris, supra, this court nevertheless has, for plain error, reviewed this charged error ex gratia. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
State v. Hays
green
1 sentence1982If interested in case, court to appoint substitute. — If the prosecuting attorney and assistant prosecuting attorney be interested or shall have been employed as counsel in any case where such employment is inconsistent with the duties of his office, or shall be related to the defendant in any criminal prosecution, either by blood or by marriage, the court having criminal jurisdiction may appoint some other attorney to prosecute or defend the cause.” In his argument under this charged error, appellant stands on the wording of § 27.030 and refers this court to State v. Hays, 23 Mo. 287 (1856); | 1 | 1982–1982 |
State v. Huett
green
2 sentences1982If interested in case, court to appoint substitute. — If the prosecuting attorney and assistant prosecuting attorney be interested or shall have been employed as counsel in any case where such employment is inconsistent with the duties of his office, or shall be related to the defendant in any criminal prosecution, either by blood or by marriage, the court having criminal jurisdiction may appoint some other attorney to prosecute or defend the cause.” In his argument under this charged error, appellant stands on the wording of § 27.030 and refers this court to State v. Hays, 23 Mo. 287 (1856); 1982If interested in case, court to appoint substitute. — If the prosecuting attorney and assistant prosecuting attorney be interested or shall have been employed as counsel in any case where such employment is inconsistent with the duties of his office, or shall be related to the defendant in any criminal prosecution, either by blood or by marriage, the court having criminal jurisdiction may appoint some other attorney to prosecute or defend the cause.” In his argument under this charged error, appellant stands on the wording of § 27.030 and refers this court to State v. Hays, 23 Mo. 287 (1856); | 1 | 1982–1982 |
State v. Sullivan
neutral
2 sentences1982If interested in case, court to appoint substitute. — If the prosecuting attorney and assistant prosecuting attorney be interested or shall have been employed as counsel in any case where such employment is inconsistent with the duties of his office, or shall be related to the defendant in any criminal prosecution, either by blood or by marriage, the court having criminal jurisdiction may appoint some other attorney to prosecute or defend the cause.” In his argument under this charged error, appellant stands on the wording of § 27.030 and refers this court to State v. Hays, 23 Mo. 287 (1856); 1982If interested in case, court to appoint substitute. — If the prosecuting attorney and assistant prosecuting attorney be interested or shall have been employed as counsel in any case where such employment is inconsistent with the duties of his office, or shall be related to the defendant in any criminal prosecution, either by blood or by marriage, the court having criminal jurisdiction may appoint some other attorney to prosecute or defend the cause.” In his argument under this charged error, appellant stands on the wording of § 27.030 and refers this court to State v. Hays, 23 Mo. 287 (1856); | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Anthony v. Jennings
green
1 sentence1970Agency, Inc., supra, Lix v. Gastian, supra, Garrison v. Ryno, Mo., 328 S.W.2d 557 , and Anthony v. Jennings, supra. The Lincoln case involved a charged violation of Section 304:018, Subd. 1(2), V.A. | 1 | 1970–1970 |
Garrison v. Ryno
green
1 sentence1970Agency, Inc., supra, Lix v. Gastian, supra, Garrison v. Ryno, Mo., 328 S.W.2d 557 , and Anthony v. Jennings, supra. The Lincoln case involved a charged violation of Section 304:018, Subd. 1(2), V.A. | 1 | 1970–1970 |
Lincoln v. Railway Express Agency, Inc.
green
1 sentence1970Agency, Inc., supra, Lix v. Gastian, supra, Garrison v. Ryno, Mo., 328 S.W.2d 557 , and Anthony v. Jennings, supra. The Lincoln case involved a charged violation of Section 304:018, Subd. 1(2), V.A. | 1 | 1970–1970 |
State v. Shelton
neutral
2 sentences1958Under the law governing proceedings before justices, it is settled that an appeal from such a judgment to the circuit court, where, by our statute law, a trial anew may be had upon the original cause of action, vacates the justice’s judgment pending the appeal, and until the appeal is finally disposed of.” In 1926 in the case of State v. Shelton, 314 Mo. 333 , 284 S.W. 433, 437 , our Supreme Court announced the rule that it is improper to show a conviction, even though it had occurred in the circuit court, where an appeal is pending, using this language: “The court is charged with error in ref 1958Under the law governing proceedings before justices, it is settled that an appeal from such a judgment to the circuit court, where, by our statute law, a trial anew may be had upon the original cause of action, vacates the justice’s judgment pending the appeal, and until the appeal is finally disposed of.” In 1926 in the case of State v. Shelton, 314 Mo. 333 , 284 S.W. 433, 437 , our Supreme Court announced the rule that it is improper to show a conviction, even though it had occurred in the circuit court, where an appeal is pending, using this language: “The court is charged with error in ref | 1 | 1958–1958 |
State v. Jackson
green
1 sentence1926We have repeatedly held that where a demurrer to plaintiff's evidence is overruled, the defendants, by offering their evidence, instead of standing on their demurrer, waive their right to Demurrer: object to the ruling of the court supra, as it then Waiver . becomes the duty of the jury to consider all the testimony in passing upon the case. [Kaemmerer v. *Page 573 Wells, 252 S.W. l.c. 732 and cases cited; State v. Hembree, 242 S.W. l.c. 913-14; State v. Jackson, 283 Mo. l.c. 24 and cases cited ( 222 S.W. 746 ); State v. Mann, 217 S.W. l.c. 69.] III. | 1 | 1926–1926 |
Simpson v. Wells
green
1 sentence1923Where a demurrer to plaintiff's evidence *Page 306 is overruled, and defendant places before the jury Demurrer to his own evidence, he waives his right to review Evidence: the action of the court in overruling such demurrer, Waiver . as it then becomes the duty of the jury to pass upon all the facts in the case. [State v. Hembree, 291 Mo. 1 ; State v. Barker, 294 Mo. 303 , 242 S.W. l.c. 409; State v. Wilson, 237 S.W. l.c. 778; Simpson v. Wells, 292 Mo. 301 , 237 S.W. l.c. 523 and numerous cases cited; Burton v. Holman, 288 Mo. 78 ; State v. Mann, 217 S.W. l.c. 69; Lareau v. Lareau, 208 S.W. 24 | 1 | 1923–1923 |
State v. Barker
neutral
1 sentence1923Where a demurrer to plaintiff's evidence *Page 306 is overruled, and defendant places before the jury Demurrer to his own evidence, he waives his right to review Evidence: the action of the court in overruling such demurrer, Waiver . as it then becomes the duty of the jury to pass upon all the facts in the case. [State v. Hembree, 291 Mo. 1 ; State v. Barker, 294 Mo. 303 , 242 S.W. l.c. 409; State v. Wilson, 237 S.W. l.c. 778; Simpson v. Wells, 292 Mo. 301 , 237 S.W. l.c. 523 and numerous cases cited; Burton v. Holman, 288 Mo. 78 ; State v. Mann, 217 S.W. l.c. 69; Lareau v. Lareau, 208 S.W. 24 | 1 | 1923–1923 |
Shanklin v. Ward
green
1 sentence1923Where a demurrer to plaintiff's evidence *Page 306 is overruled, and defendant places before the jury Demurrer to his own evidence, he waives his right to review Evidence: the action of the court in overruling such demurrer, Waiver . as it then becomes the duty of the jury to pass upon all the facts in the case. [State v. Hembree, 291 Mo. 1 ; State v. Barker, 294 Mo. 303 , 242 S.W. l.c. 409; State v. Wilson, 237 S.W. l.c. 778; Simpson v. Wells, 292 Mo. 301 , 237 S.W. l.c. 523 and numerous cases cited; Burton v. Holman, 288 Mo. 78 ; State v. Mann, 217 S.W. l.c. 69; Lareau v. Lareau, 208 S.W. 24 | 1 | 1923–1923 |
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.