52 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1867–2025 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. Samuelgreen2 sentences2025"To qualify as a tacit admission, the following conditions must be met: '(1) the statement must be made in the presence and hearing of the accused; (2) the statement 12 must be sufficiently direct, as naturally would call for a reply; and (3) the statement must not have been made at a judicial proceeding, or while the accused was in custody or under arrest.'" Id. (quoting State v. Samuel, 521 S.W.2d 374, 375 (Mo. banc 1975)7 (internal citations omitted)). 2005To qualify as a tacit admission, three requirements must be met: “(1) the statement must be made in the presence and hearing of the accused; (2) the statement must be sufficiently direct, as naturally would call for a reply; and (3) the statement must not have been made at a judicial proceeding, or while the accused was in custody or under arrest.” State v. Samuel, 521 S.W.2d 374, 375 (Mo. banc 1975) (internal citations omitted). | 6 | 9 |
Artilla Cove Resort, Inc. v. Hartleygreen2 sentences2009See Artilla Cove Resort, Inc. v. Hartley, 72 S.W.3d 291, 299 (Mo.App. 2009See Artilla Cove Resort, Inc. v. Hartley, 72 S.W.3d 291, 299 (Mo.App. | 4 | 4 |
State v. Kissingergreen2 sentences1984State v. Samuel, supra; it must have been “direct,” that is, addressed to the defendant and not to some other person, State v. Kissinger, 123 S.W.2d 81, 83 (Mo.1938); State v. Mullins, supra, at 627 . 1975State v. Burk, 234 Mo. 574 , 137 S.W. 969, 970 (1911); State v. Walker, 78 Mo. 380, 388 (1883); State v. Lovell, 235 Mo. 343, 353, 354 , 138 S.W. 523, 525 (1911); State v. Kissinger, 343 Mo. 781, 786 , 123 S.W.2d 81, 83 (1938); State v. Dowling, 348 Mo. 589, 598, 599 , 154 S.W.2d 749, 755 (1941); State v. Allen, 235 S.W.2d 294 (Mo.1948), and State v. Thomas, 440 S.W.2d 467, 469, 470 (Mo.1969); (2) the statement must be sufficiently direct, as naturally would call for a reply. | 2 | 2 |
Timberlake v. Stategreen1 sentence2017See also Timberlake, 419 S.W.3d at 226 (stating the circuit court issued a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum and sent it to the sheriffs office for service to the probationer who was incarcerated). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Rielgreen2 sentences2004A defendant makes a tacit admission of guilt when the defendant fails to respond to or significantly acquiesces in the import of an inculpatory statement (e.g., by making an equivocal, ambivalent, or evasive response, People v. Riel, 22 Cal.4th 1153 , 96 Cal.Rptr.2d 1 , 998 P.2d 969, 995 (2000)) when the inculpatory statement: (1) was made in the presence and hearing of the accused, (2) was sufficiently direct, as would naturally call for a reply, and (3) was not made at a judicial proceeding, or while the accused was in custody or under arrest. 2004A defendant makes a tacit admission of guilt when the defendant fails to respond to or significantly acquiesces in the import of an inculpatory statement (e.g., by making an equivocal, ambivalent, or evasive response, People v. Riel, 22 Cal.4th 1153 , 96 Cal.Rptr.2d 1 , 998 P.2d 969, 995 (2000)) when the inculpatory statement: (1) was made in the presence and hearing of the accused, (2) was sufficiently direct, as would naturally call for a reply, and (3) was not made at a judicial proceeding, or while the accused was in custody or under arrest. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Valentinegreen1 sentence1993State v. Valentine, 646 S.W.2d 729, 731 (Mo.1983) (citing State v. Samuel, 521 S.W.2d 374, 375 (Mo. banc 1975)). | 1 | 1 |
Bashor v. Turpingreen1 sentence1991See also Bashor v. Turpin, 506 S.W.2d 412, 421 (Mo.1974). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Clarkgreen1 sentence1990“The Missouri tacit admission rule requires that (1) the statement is made in the presence and hearing of the accused, (2) the statement is sufficiently direct as naturally would call for a reply, and (3) the statement must not be made at a judicial proceeding or while the accused was in custody or under arrest.” State v. Clark, 711 S.W.2d 928, 931 (Mo.App.1986). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. James Harold Hoodgreen1 sentence1986United States v. Hood, 593 F.2d 293, 298 (8th Cir.1979). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Hillgreen1 sentence1977Therefore, this objection is not preserved for our review, State v. Hill, 539 S.W.2d 521, 528-30 (Mo.App.1976), Rule 27.20(a). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Evansgreen2 sentences1976State v. Evans, 161 Mo. 95 , 61 S.W. 590, 593 (1901). 1976State v. Evans, 161 Mo. 95 , 61 S.W. 590, 593 (1901). | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Walkergreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Burkgreen | 1 | 1 |
State v. Lovellgreen2 sentences1975State v. Burk, 234 Mo. 574 , 137 S.W. 969, 970 (1911); State v. Walker, 78 Mo. 380, 388 (1883); State v. Lovell, 235 Mo. 343, 353, 354 , 138 S.W. 523, 525 (1911); State v. Kissinger, 343 Mo. 781, 786 , 123 S.W.2d 81, 83 (1938); State v. Dowling, 348 Mo. 589, 598, 599 , 154 S.W.2d 749, 755 (1941); State v. Allen, 235 S.W.2d 294 (Mo.1948), and State v. Thomas, 440 S.W.2d 467, 469, 470 (Mo.1969); (2) the statement must be sufficiently direct, as naturally would call for a reply. 1975State v. Burk, 234 Mo. 574 , 137 S.W. 969, 970 (1911); State v. Walker, 78 Mo. 380, 388 (1883); State v. Lovell, 235 Mo. 343, 353, 354 , 138 S.W. 523, 525 (1911); State v. Kissinger, 343 Mo. 781, 786 , 123 S.W.2d 81, 83 (1938); State v. Dowling, 348 Mo. 589, 598, 599 , 154 S.W.2d 749, 755 (1941); State v. Allen, 235 S.W.2d 294 (Mo.1948), and State v. Thomas, 440 S.W.2d 467, 469, 470 (Mo.1969); (2) the statement must be sufficiently direct, as naturally would call for a reply. | 1 | 1 |
Barylski v. Stategreen1 sentence1975Each defendant’s claim of inducement to plead guilty must be measured “in the light of the reasonableness of the claimed belief.” Barylski v. State, 473 S.W.2d 399, 401 (Mo.1971). | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Dowlinggreen | 1 | 1 |
State v. Thomasgreen1 sentence1975State v. Burk, 234 Mo. 574 , 137 S.W. 969, 970 (1911); State v. Walker, 78 Mo. 380, 388 (1883); State v. Lovell, 235 Mo. 343, 353, 354 , 138 S.W. 523, 525 (1911); State v. Kissinger, 343 Mo. 781, 786 , 123 S.W.2d 81, 83 (1938); State v. Dowling, 348 Mo. 589, 598, 599 , 154 S.W.2d 749, 755 (1941); State v. Allen, 235 S.W.2d 294 (Mo.1948), and State v. Thomas, 440 S.W.2d 467, 469, 470 (Mo.1969); (2) the statement must be sufficiently direct, as naturally would call for a reply. | 1 | 1 |
| James Francis Hill v. United Statesgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Ninemiresgreen | 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. Forest
green
1 sentence2025"To qualify as a tacit admission, the following conditions must be met: '(1) the statement must be made in the presence and hearing of the accused; (2) the statement 12 must be sufficiently direct, as naturally would call for a reply; and (3) the statement must not have been made at a judicial proceeding, or while the accused was in custody or under arrest.'" Id. (quoting State v. Samuel, 521 S.W.2d 374, 375 (Mo. banc 1975)7 (internal citations omitted)). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
State ex rel. Missouri Public Defender Commission v. Waters
green
1 sentence2023Woolery explained that, in light of this string of cases directly holding that a Missouri arraignment was not a critical stage requiring the presence of defense counsel, dicta in Waters, 370 S.W.3d at 606-07 , and State v. Heidbrink, 670 S.W.3d 114 , 133 (Mo. App. E.D. 2023), suggesting that an arraignment is a critical stage, could not be considered controlling. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
State v. Prince
green
1 sentence2021See Wood, 580 S.W.3d at 575; Prince, 534 S.W.3d at 818 (quoting Forrest, 183 S.W.3d at 223–24). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Forrest
green
1 sentence2021See Wood, 580 S.W.3d at 575; Prince, 534 S.W.3d at 818 (quoting Forrest, 183 S.W.3d at 223–24). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Jones
green
1 sentence2015Id. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Dolan v. Dolan
green
1 sentence2013Id. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
State v. Case
green
2 sentences2010First, the inculpatory statement must be “made in the presence and hearing of the accused.” Case, 140 S.W.3d at 85 . 2010Second, the incul-patory statement must be “sufficiently direct, as would naturally call for a reply.” Id. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
State v. Gilmore
green
1 sentence2004State v. Gilmore, 22 S.W.3d at 718 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Wahl v. Cunningham
green
2 sentences1991The extent of Counselor Hoemeke’s testimony on this issue was to the effect that Mrs. Dick stated that she was making the transfer to fulfill the desires of Stratford Morton to keep the property in its “natural state.” In Wahl v. Cunningham, 6 S.W.2d 576 (Mo. banc 1928), the Missouri Supreme Court stated the general rule that “where two or more persons employ the same attorney in the same business, their communications with the attorney in relation to such business are not privileged inter se even though the interest of such persons are adverse to each other, where the disclo sures were made i 1991The extent of Counselor Hoemeke’s testimony on this issue was to the effect that Mrs. Dick stated that she was making the transfer to fulfill the desires of Stratford Morton to keep the property in its “natural state.” In Wahl v. Cunningham, 6 S.W.2d 576 (Mo. banc 1928), the Missouri Supreme Court stated the general rule that “where two or more persons employ the same attorney in the same business, their communications with the attorney in relation to such business are not privileged inter se even though the interest of such persons are adverse to each other, where the disclo sures were made i | 1 | 1991–1991 |
State v. Embry
green
1 sentence1977Cf. State v. Embry, 530 S.W.2d 401 (Mo.App.1975), where it was reversible error for the court to sustain objections that had not been made and otherwise took over or interfered with defendant’s cross-examination. | 1 | 1977–1977 |
Canty v. Halpin
green
1 sentence1976Canty v. Halpin, 294 Mo. 118 , 242 S.W. 94 (banc 1922); 58 Am.Jur. | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Canty v. Halpin
green
1 sentence1976Canty v. Halpin, 294 Mo. 118 , 242 S.W. 94 (banc 1922); 58 Am.Jur. | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Massiah v. United States
green
2 sentences1975The Court said: “The Superior Court, in affirming the conviction of the defendant, declared that it was bound by Commonwealth v. Vallone, 347 Pa. 419 , 32 A.2d 889 , which pronounced the proposition: “ ‘The rule of evidence is well established that, when a statement made in the presence and hearing of a person is incriminating in character and naturally calls for a denial but is not challenged or contradicted by the accused *376 although he has opportunity and liberty to speak, the statement and the fact of his failure to deny it are admissible in evidence as an implied admission of the truth 1975The Court said: “The Superior Court, in affirming the conviction of the defendant, declared that it was bound by Commonwealth v. Vallone, 347 Pa. 419 , 32 A.2d 889 , which pronounced the proposition: “ ‘The rule of evidence is well established that, when a statement made in the presence and hearing of a person is incriminating in character and naturally calls for a denial but is not challenged or contradicted by the accused *376 although he has opportunity and liberty to speak, the statement and the fact of his failure to deny it are admissible in evidence as an implied admission of the truth | 1 | 1975–1975 |
| Malloy v. Hogan green | 1 | 1975–1975 |
Escobedo v. Illinois
green
2 sentences1975The Court said: “The Superior Court, in affirming the conviction of the defendant, declared that it was bound by Commonwealth v. Vallone, 347 Pa. 419 , 32 A.2d 889 , which pronounced the proposition: “ ‘The rule of evidence is well established that, when a statement made in the presence and hearing of a person is incriminating in character and naturally calls for a denial but is not challenged or contradicted by the accused *376 although he has opportunity and liberty to speak, the statement and the fact of his failure to deny it are admissible in evidence as an implied admission of the truth 1975The Court said: “The Superior Court, in affirming the conviction of the defendant, declared that it was bound by Commonwealth v. Vallone, 347 Pa. 419 , 32 A.2d 889 , which pronounced the proposition: “ ‘The rule of evidence is well established that, when a statement made in the presence and hearing of a person is incriminating in character and naturally calls for a denial but is not challenged or contradicted by the accused *376 although he has opportunity and liberty to speak, the statement and the fact of his failure to deny it are admissible in evidence as an implied admission of the truth | 1 | 1975–1975 |
| Gideon v. Wainwright green | 1 | 1975–1975 |
Miranda v. Arizona
green
2 sentences1975The Court said: “The Superior Court, in affirming the conviction of the defendant, declared that it was bound by Commonwealth v. Vallone, 347 Pa. 419 , 32 A.2d 889 , which pronounced the proposition: “ ‘The rule of evidence is well established that, when a statement made in the presence and hearing of a person is incriminating in character and naturally calls for a denial but is not challenged or contradicted by the accused *376 although he has opportunity and liberty to speak, the statement and the fact of his failure to deny it are admissible in evidence as an implied admission of the truth 1975The Court said: “The Superior Court, in affirming the conviction of the defendant, declared that it was bound by Commonwealth v. Vallone, 347 Pa. 419 , 32 A.2d 889 , which pronounced the proposition: “ ‘The rule of evidence is well established that, when a statement made in the presence and hearing of a person is incriminating in character and naturally calls for a denial but is not challenged or contradicted by the accused *376 although he has opportunity and liberty to speak, the statement and the fact of his failure to deny it are admissible in evidence as an implied admission of the truth | 1 | 1975–1975 |
State v. Allen
green
1 sentence1975State v. Burk, 234 Mo. 574 , 137 S.W. 969, 970 (1911); State v. Walker, 78 Mo. 380, 388 (1883); State v. Lovell, 235 Mo. 343, 353, 354 , 138 S.W. 523, 525 (1911); State v. Kissinger, 343 Mo. 781, 786 , 123 S.W.2d 81, 83 (1938); State v. Dowling, 348 Mo. 589, 598, 599 , 154 S.W.2d 749, 755 (1941); State v. Allen, 235 S.W.2d 294 (Mo.1948), and State v. Thomas, 440 S.W.2d 467, 469, 470 (Mo.1969); (2) the statement must be sufficiently direct, as naturally would call for a reply. | 1 | 1975–1975 |
| Commonwealth v. Vallone green | 1 | 1975–1975 |
| Jackson v. Denno green | 1 | 1969–1969 |
| Barrett v. Hunter, Warden. Rutledge v. Hunter, Warden green | 1 | 1958–1958 |
| Robert M. Kossin v. United States green | 1 | 1958–1958 |
| State v. Kitchin green | 1 | 1958–1958 |
| Barrett v. Hunter green | 1 | 1958–1958 |
| Hessey v. Baltimore Transit Co. green | 1 | 1958–1958 |
| In re Fletcher green | 1 | 1958–1958 |
| Walton v. California green | 1 | 1958–1958 |
| Harbison v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. green | 1 | 1941–1941 |
| Steltemeier v. Barrett neutral | 1 | 1936–1936 |
| Tuite v. Supreme Forest Woodmen Circle green | 1 | 1936–1936 |
| Grindstaff v. J. Goldberg & Sons Structural Steel Co. green | 1 | 1933–1933 |
| Bouillon v. Laclede Gas Light Co. green | 1 | 1933–1933 |
| Ray County Savings Bank v. Hutton green | 1 | 1931–1931 |
| State v. Wana neutral | 1 | 1931–1931 |
| Cazzell v. Schofield green | 1 | 1929–1929 |
| Garey v. Jackson neutral | 1 | 1924–1924 |
| Branstetter v. Dorrough neutral | 1 | 1924–1924 |
| Callahan v. Ingram green | 1 | 1918–1918 |
| Jones v. Murray green | 1 | 1918–1918 |
| Rail v. National Newspaper Ass'n green | 1 | 1918–1918 |
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.
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.