Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
11 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1913–2021 2 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. Sprinklegreen1 sentence2021“Even if the trial court abuses its discretion in allowing evidence in, appellant must show the 12 admission of the evidence was prejudicial to be entitled to relief.” Sprinkle, 122 S.W.3d at 658 (citation omitted). [W]e review the trial court, not just for mere error, but for prejudice, and will reverse only if the error was so prejudicial that it deprived the defendant of a fair trial. | 1 | 1 |
Calcara v. PPG Industries, Inc.green1 sentence2021Calcara v. PPG Industries, Inc., 211 S.W.3d 142, 144 (Mo. App. W.D. 2007). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Branamgreen1 sentence2017See McBenge , 507 S.W.3d at 113 . | 1 | 1 |
Rodriguez v. General Accident Insurance Co. of Americagreen1 sentence2013See id. at 382-83 (definition of “underinsured motor vehicle” to the same effect regarded as unambiguous). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Dismanggreen1 sentence2010In State v. Dismang, the statutory definition of “serious physical injury” was contained in a separate jury instruction at the end of the instruction pack rather than in the instructions themselves, and the court rejected the contention that the jury could have failed to understand the concept because there was little potential for confusing or misleading the jury. 151 S.W.3d 155, 164-65 (Mo.App. | 1 | 1 |
Bellos v. Winklesgreen1 sentence2002“We will affirm the judgment of dismissal if it can be sustained on any ground supported by the motion to dismiss.” Bellos v. Winkles, 14 S.W.3d 653, 655 (Mo.App.2000). | 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 v. McKay
green
1 sentence2018That is not, however, the end of the analysis, for "[t]he plain language of the UMDDL mandates the dismissal of a complaint not brought to trial within 180 days unless the 180-day period is tolled, and if the court finds that the offender's constitutional right to a speedy trial has been denied." State v. McKay , 411 S.W.3d 295 , 302 (Mo. App. E.D. 2013) (citation omitted) (emphasis added). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Carson
green
1 sentence2000A person [knew, or ] ‘acts knowingly 1 , or with knowledge, “(1) With respect to his conduct or to attendant circumstances when he is aware of the nature of his conduct or that those circumstances exist, or “(2) With respect to a result of his conduct when he is aware that his conduct is practically certain to cause that result.” 3 Defendant insists that by not having the statutory definition of “knowingly” as part of instruction 5, it did “not conform to the substantive law, and lowers the State’s burden of proof by not informing the jury how it was to decide whether [Defendant’s] possession | 1 | 2000–2000 |
State v. Hooker
green
1 sentence2000A person [knew, or ] ‘acts knowingly 1 , or with knowledge, “(1) With respect to his conduct or to attendant circumstances when he is aware of the nature of his conduct or that those circumstances exist, or “(2) With respect to a result of his conduct when he is aware that his conduct is practically certain to cause that result.” 3 Defendant insists that by not having the statutory definition of “knowingly” as part of instruction 5, it did “not conform to the substantive law, and lowers the State’s burden of proof by not informing the jury how it was to decide whether [Defendant’s] possession | 1 | 2000–2000 |
State v. Anding
green
1 sentence2000A person [knew, or ] ‘acts knowingly 1 , or with knowledge, “(1) With respect to his conduct or to attendant circumstances when he is aware of the nature of his conduct or that those circumstances exist, or “(2) With respect to a result of his conduct when he is aware that his conduct is practically certain to cause that result.” 3 Defendant insists that by not having the statutory definition of “knowingly” as part of instruction 5, it did “not conform to the substantive law, and lowers the State’s burden of proof by not informing the jury how it was to decide whether [Defendant’s] possession | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Willott v. Willott
green
2 sentences1986Id. 62 S.W.2d at 1085-86 . 1986Id. 62 S.W.2d at 1085-86 . | 1 | 1986–1986 |
State v. Slusher
neutral
2 sentences1950State v. Slusher, 301 Mo. 285, 292-293 , 256 S.W. 817 , held the same where the State's instruction purporting to cover the whole case ignored the defense that the defendant had bought the boat involved from a third person and thus come by it honestly. 1950State v. Slusher, 301 Mo. 285, 292-293 , 256 S.W. 817 , held the same where the State's instruction purporting to cover the whole case ignored the defense that the defendant had bought the boat involved from a third person and thus come by it honestly. | 1 | 1950–1950 |
Bledsoe v. Simms
neutral
2 sentences1913But until the possession of the tenant has become so matured, it would seem to follow that if the plaintiff shows a prior possession, and upon which, the defendant entered without its having been formally abandoned as derelict, the presumption which arose from the tenant’s possession is transferred to the prior possession of the plaintiff, and the tenant, to recall that presumption, must, show a still prior possession; and so the presumption may be removed from one side to the other, toties quoties, until one party or the other has shown a possession which cannot be overreached, or puts an end 1913But until the possession of the tenant has become so matured, it would seem to follow that if the plaintiff shows a prior possession, and upon which, the defendant entered without its having been formally abandoned as derelict, the presumption which arose from the tenant’s possession is transferred to the prior possession of the plaintiff, and the tenant, to recall that presumption, must, show a still prior possession; and so the presumption may be removed from one side to the other, toties quoties, until one party or the other has shown a possession which cannot be overreached, or puts an end | 1 | 1913–1913 |
Hunt v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.
neutral
1 sentence1913But until the possession of the tenant has become so matured, it would seem to follow that if the plaintiff shows a prior possession, and upon which, the defendant entered without its having been formally abandoned as derelict, the presumption which arose from the tenant’s possession is transferred to the prior possession of the plaintiff, and the tenant, to recall that presumption, must, show a still prior possession; and so the presumption may be removed from one side to the other, toties quoties, until one party or the other has shown a possession which cannot be overreached, or puts an end | 1 | 1913–1913 |
Bains v. Bullock
green
1 sentence1913But until the possession of the tenant has become so matured, it would seem to follow that if the plaintiff shows a prior possession, and upon which, the defendant entered without its having been formally abandoned as derelict, the presumption which arose from the tenant’s possession is transferred to the prior possession of the plaintiff, and the tenant, to recall that presumption, must, show a still prior possession; and so the presumption may be removed from one side to the other, toties quoties, until one party or the other has shown a possession which cannot be overreached, or puts an end | 1 | 1913–1913 |
Hall v. Gallemore
green
1 sentence1913But until the possession of the tenant has become so matured, it would seem to follow that if the plaintiff shows a prior possession, and upon which, the defendant entered without its having been formally abandoned as derelict, the presumption which arose from the tenant’s possession is transferred to the prior possession of the plaintiff, and the tenant, to recall that presumption, must, show a still prior possession; and so the presumption may be removed from one side to the other, toties quoties, until one party or the other has shown a possession which cannot be overreached, or puts an end | 1 | 1913–1913 |
Kelpe v. Kuppertz
neutral
1 sentence1913But until the possession of the tenant has become so matured, it would seem to follow that if the plaintiff shows a prior possession, and upon which, the defendant entered without its having been formally abandoned as derelict, the presumption which arose from the tenant’s possession is transferred to the prior possession of the plaintiff, and the tenant, to recall that presumption, must, show a still prior possession; and so the presumption may be removed from one side to the other, toties quoties, until one party or the other has shown a possession which cannot be overreached, or puts an end | 1 | 1913–1913 |
Crockett v. Morrison
green
1 sentence1913But until the possession of the tenant has become so matured, it would seem to follow that if the plaintiff shows a prior possession, and upon which, the defendant entered without its having been formally abandoned as derelict, the presumption which arose from the tenant’s possession is transferred to the prior possession of the plaintiff, and the tenant, to recall that presumption, must, show a still prior possession; and so the presumption may be removed from one side to the other, toties quoties, until one party or the other has shown a possession which cannot be overreached, or puts an end | 1 | 1913–1913 |
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.