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.
10 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1956–1999 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. Wilborngreen2 sentences1984See State v. Harris, 636 S.W.2d 403, 404-405 (Mo.App.1982) and State v. Wilborn, 525 S.W.2d 87, 94-95 (Mo.App.1975). 1984See State v. Harris, 636 S.W.2d 403, 404-405 (Mo.App. 1982) and State v. Wilborn, 525 S.W.2d 87, 94-95 (Mo.App.1975). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Harrisgreen2 sentences1984See State v. Harris, 636 S.W.2d 403, 404-405 (Mo.App.1982) and State v. Wilborn, 525 S.W.2d 87, 94-95 (Mo.App.1975). 1984See State v. Harris, 636 S.W.2d 403, 404-405 (Mo.App. 1982) and State v. Wilborn, 525 S.W.2d 87, 94-95 (Mo.App.1975). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Raspberrygreen1 sentence1973The declaration of a mistrial is a drastic remedy and should be exercised only in extraordinary circumstances where the prejudicial effect can be removed in no other way, State v. Raspberry, 452 S.W.2d 169, 173 (Mo.1970), or where the incident is so grievous that the prejudicial effect can be removed in no other way, State v. Camper, 391 S.W.2d 926, 928 (Mo.1965). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Campergreen1 sentence1973The declaration of a mistrial is a drastic remedy and should be exercised only in extraordinary circumstances where the prejudicial effect can be removed in no other way, State v. Raspberry, 452 S.W.2d 169, 173 (Mo.1970), or where the incident is so grievous that the prejudicial effect can be removed in no other way, State v. Camper, 391 S.W.2d 926, 928 (Mo.1965). | 1 | 1 |
Gooch v. Avsco, Incorporatedgreen1 sentence1967Appellant concedes the propriety of examining prospective jurors in respect to their connections with insurance companies interested in the defense of a case, and that “it is within the province of the trial judge to reasonably circumscribe the voir dire inquiry in that respect by limiting the number of questions and imposing other curbs on the nature of the examina-tion.” Gooch v. Avsco, Inc., Mo., 340 S.W. 2d 665, 667 [1,2]. | 1 | 1 |
Galber v. Grossberggreen2 sentences1956Co., Gerran v. Minor, supra, or does not deny but merely disclaims knowledge of the fact of insurance, Galber v. Grossberg, 324 Mo. 742 , 25 S.W.2d 96, 97 (11), or refuses to be sworn for questioning, Plannett v. McFall, Mo.App., 284 S.W. 850 , 853 [5-7], knowledge of plaintiff’s counsel of facts indicating insurance coverage has been held sufficient to sustain the voir dire inquiry. 1956Co., Gerran v. Minor, supra, or does not deny but merely disclaims knowledge of the fact of insurance, Galber v. Grossberg, 324 Mo. 742 , 25 S.W.2d 96, 97 (11), or refuses to be sworn for questioning, Plannett v. McFall, Mo.App., 284 S.W. 850 , 853 [5-7], knowledge of plaintiff’s counsel of facts indicating insurance coverage has been held sufficient to sustain the voir dire inquiry. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Mu'Min v. Virginia
green
2 sentences1999The voir dire examination conducted in this case resembles that upheld in Mu’Min v. Virginia, 500 U.S. 415 , 111 S.Ct. 1899 , 114 L.Ed.2d 498 (1991). 1999The voir dire examination conducted in this case resembles that upheld in Mu’Min v. Virginia, 500 U.S. 415 , 111 S.Ct. 1899 , 114 L.Ed.2d 498 (1991). | 1 | 1999–1999 |
State v. Letcher
green
1 sentence1998Following the rationale in Walker , the court in State v. Letcher found that the trial court did not improperly restrict the defendant’s voir dire inquiry of misidentification by sustaining the state’s objection to the defendant’s questioning of whether any of the venire panel had been victims of misiden-tification. 772 S.W.2d at 799 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
State Ex Rel. Missouri Highway & Transportation Commission v. Buys
green
1 sentence1998In this regard, we would agree with the respondent to the extent that there is authority for the proposition that “[e]ven when the subject of a voir dire inquiry is appropriate, the manner in which the question is asked may taint the question rendering it improper.” Buys, 909 S.W.2d at 738 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
State v. Norton
green
1 sentence1995Id. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Gillespie ex rel. Gillespie v. Goedecke
green
1 sentence1994Id. at 468-69 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Jackson v. Denno
green
2 sentences1971Although not presented to us as a point of error defendant makes the further contention in the argument portion of his brief that at the voir dire hearing on the question of voluntariness the court “should have made a clear finding, whether formal or informal, that the statements and admissions were voluntarily made and the reasons for this finding,” citing Jackson v. Denno, 378 U.S. 368 , 84 S.Ct. 1774 , 12 L.Ed. 2d 908 , and State v. Glenn, Mo.Sup., 429 S.W.2d 225 . 1971Although not presented to us as a point of error defendant makes the further contention in the argument portion of his brief that at the voir dire hearing on the question of voluntariness the court “should have made a clear finding, whether formal or informal, that the statements and admissions were voluntarily made and the reasons for this finding,” citing Jackson v. Denno, 378 U.S. 368 , 84 S.Ct. 1774 , 12 L.Ed. 2d 908 , and State v. Glenn, Mo.Sup., 429 S.W.2d 225 . | 1 | 1971–1971 |
State v. Glenn
green
1 sentence1971Although not presented to us as a point of error defendant makes the further contention in the argument portion of his brief that at the voir dire hearing on the question of voluntariness the court “should have made a clear finding, whether formal or informal, that the statements and admissions were voluntarily made and the reasons for this finding,” citing Jackson v. Denno, 378 U.S. 368 , 84 S.Ct. 1774 , 12 L.Ed. 2d 908 , and State v. Glenn, Mo.Sup., 429 S.W.2d 225 . | 1 | 1971–1971 |
Rodenberg Ex Rel. Rodenberg v. Nickels
green
1 sentence1967Appellant attempts to support her argument by Rodenberg v. Nichels, Mo.App., 357 S.W.2d 551 , which actually supports respondent because five questions relating to insurance were asked and no reversal was ordered, the court simply observing “that there is surely a limit to the number and extent of these questions. | 1 | 1967–1967 |
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.