11 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1975–2021 1 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. Reesegreen2 sentences1990Reese, 625 S.W.2d at 132 ; Riefle, 714 S.W.2d at 605-06 . 1988In State v. Clark, 671 S.W.2d 1, 4 [11] (Mo.App.1983), the court quoted from State v. Reese, 625 S.W.2d 130, 132 (Mo.1981), as follows: In determining whether the consent to search was voluntarily given, the court may consider such factors as: “[T]he number of officers present, the degree to which they emphasized their authority, whether weapons were displayed, whether the person was already in police custody, whether there was any fraud on the part of the officers, the acts and statements of the consenter, and other matters comprising the totality of the circumstances.” Goeke does not point t | 2 | 3 |
State v. Rushgreen2 sentences1981“In determining whether there is a voluntary consent to search, the court may consider such factors as the number of officers present, the degree to which they emphasized their authority, whether weapons were displayed, whether the person was already in police custody, whether there was any fraud on the part of the officers, the acts and statements of the consenter, and other matters comprising ‘the totality of the circumstances.' State v. Rush, supra, at 215.” 526 S.W.2d at 98 . 1975In determining whether there is a voluntary consent to search, the court may consider such factors as the number of officers present, the degree to which they emphasized their authority, whether weapons were displayed, whether the person was already in police custody, whether there was any fraud on the part of the officers, the acts and statements of the consenter, and other matters comprising “the totality of the circumstances.” State v. Rush, supra, at 215. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Rieflegreen2 sentences1992“In determining whether there is a voluntary consent to search, the court may consider such factors as the number of officers present, the degree to which they emphasized their authority, whether weapons were displayed, whether the person was already in police custody, whether there was any fraud on the part of the officers, the acts and statements of the consenter, and other matters comprising the ‘totality of the circumstances.’ ” State v. Riefle, 714 S.W.2d 604, 605-06 (Mo.App.1986). 1990Reese, 625 S.W.2d at 132 ; Riefle, 714 S.W.2d at 605-06 . | 1 | 2 |
Everhart v. Westmorelandgreen1 sentence2021In showing “a valid prior agreement evidencing a meeting of the minds,” “[t]he party . . . need not show agreement on any particular words or language but must only show agreement to accomplish a particular objective.” Everhart v. Westmoreland, 898 S.W.2d 634, 637 (Mo. App. W.D. 1995) (citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Lunceford v. Houghtlingreen1 sentence2021In determining whether a mutual mistake occurred, a court may consider such factors as “the wording of the contract as signed by the parties, the relationship of the parties, the subject matter of the contract, the usages of the business, the circumstances surrounding the execution of the contract, and its interpretation by the parties.” Traweek v. Smith, 607 S.W.3d 779 , 786 (Mo. App. W.D. 2020) (quoting Lunceford v. Houghtlin, 326 S.W.3d 53, 64 (Mo. App. W.D. 2010) (“Lunceford II”)). | 1 | 1 |
Malawey v. Malaweygreen1 sentence2010See Malawey v. Malawey, 137 S.W.3d 518, 523 (Mo.App. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Clarkgreen1 sentence1988In State v. Clark, 671 S.W.2d 1, 4 [11] (Mo.App.1983), the court quoted from State v. Reese, 625 S.W.2d 130, 132 (Mo.1981), as follows: In determining whether the consent to search was voluntarily given, the court may consider such factors as: “[T]he number of officers present, the degree to which they emphasized their authority, whether weapons were displayed, whether the person was already in police custody, whether there was any fraud on the part of the officers, the acts and statements of the consenter, and other matters comprising the totality of the circumstances.” Goeke does not point t | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Merriweather v. State
green
1 sentence2009Id. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
State v. Stolzman
green
1 sentence1991Stolzman, 799 S.W.2d at 936 ; Sanad , 769 S,W.2d at 438. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
State v. DuBose
green
1 sentence1986“In determining whether there is a voluntary consent to search, the court may consider such factors as the number of officers present, the degree to which they emphasized their authority, whether weapons were displayed, whether the person was already in police custody, whether there was any fraud on the part of the officers, the acts and statements of the consenter, and other matters com prising ‘the totality of the circumstances.’ ” To the same effect see State v. DuBose, 617 S.W.2d 509 [10-13] (Mo.App.1981). | 1 | 1986–1986 |
State v. Berry
green
1 sentence1981“In determining whether there is a voluntary consent to search, the court may consider such factors as the number of officers present, the degree to which they emphasized their authority, whether weapons were displayed, whether the person was already in police custody, whether there was any fraud on the part of the officers, the acts and statements of the consenter, and other matters comprising ‘the totality of the circumstances.' State v. Rush, supra, at 215.” 526 S.W.2d at 98 . | 1 | 1981–1981 |
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.