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 1 courts 2003–2025 3 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. Westfallgreen2 sentences2025The first step requires us to determine if the claim of error "facially establishes substantial grounds for believing that manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice has resulted." Id. (quoting State v. Minor, 648 S.W.3d 721 , 731 (Mo. banc 2022)). "[T]he failure to instruct upon a defense supported by the evidence is plain error affecting substantial rights." State v. Jones, 686 S.W.3d 293 , 304 (Mo. App. E.D. 2024) (quoting State v. Westfall, 75 S.W.3d 278, 281 (Mo. banc 2002)). 2025Plain error review first requires us to determine if the claim of error "facially establishes substantial grounds for believing that manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice has resulted." State v. Mills, 687 S.W.3d 668 , 675 (Mo. banc 2024) (quotation omitted). "[T]he failure to instruct upon a defense supported by the evidence is plain error affecting substantial rights." State v. Jones, 686 S.W.3d 293 , 304 (Mo. App. E.D. 2024) (quoting State v. Westfall, 75 S.W.3d 278, 281 (Mo. banc 2002)). | 7 | 11 |
State of Missouri v. Richard John Whipplegreen1 sentence2025This is so "even if a self-defense instruction is not requested or was requested but not in the proper form." State v. Whipple, 501 S.W.3d 507, 513 (Mo. App. E.D. 2016) (citing Westfall, 75 S.W.3d at 280-81 , 281 n. 9). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Boldengreen1 sentence2016Defendant then argues for a per se application of the Westfall rule because. the duty .to instruct on self-defense where supported by the evidence is so strong that, ,“[i]f the defendant injects self-defense into the case and there is substantial evidence to support a self-defense instruction, it is reversible error for the trial court to fail to submit a self-defense instruction to the jury under plain error review.” State v. Bolden, 371 S.W.3d 802, 805 (Mo. banc 2012), citing Westfall, 75 S.W.3d at 281 n.9. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Huffmangreen1 sentence2010To determine if substantial evidence exists is a question of law, and the “failure to instruct upon a defense supported by the evidence is plain error affecting substantial rights.” State v. Huffman, 711 S.W.2d 192, 192 (Mo.App.1986); State v. Westfall, 75 S.W.3d 278, 281 (Mo. banc 2002). | 1 | 1 |
Dorsey v. Stategreen1 sentence2007Whether plain error review or a properly preserved claim of error, the proper analysis results in a review of the evidence to determine if "substantial evidence" supported the giving of a self-defense instruction. [1] State v. Shockley, 98 S.W.3d 885, 891 (Mo. App.2003). [2] Dorsey v. State, 113 S.W.3d 311, 317-18 (Mo.App.2003). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Shockleygreen1 sentence2007Whether plain error review or a properly preserved claim of error, the proper analysis results in a review of the evidence to determine if "substantial evidence" supported the giving of a self-defense instruction. [1] State v. Shockley, 98 S.W.3d 885, 891 (Mo. App.2003). [2] Dorsey v. State, 113 S.W.3d 311, 317-18 (Mo.App.2003). | 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. Hiltibidal
green
1 sentence2016Defendant’s argument in all three points is premised upon the Westfall statement that “[e]ven if no objection is made, the failure to instruct upon a defense supported by the evidence is plain error affecting substantial rights.” Id. at 281 . | 1 | 2016–2016 |
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.