494.485. Alternate jurors. — If in any case to be tried before a jury it appears to the court to be appropriate, the court may direct that a number of jurors in addition to the regular jury be called and impaneled to sit as alternate jurors. Alternate jurors, in the order in which they are called, shall replace jurors who, prior to the time the jury retires to consider its verdict, become or are found to be unable or disqualified to perform their duties. Alternate jurors shall be selected in the same manner, shall have the same qualifications, shall be subject to the same examination and challenges, shall take the same oath and shall have the same functions, powers, facilities and privileges as the principal jurors. Alternate jurors who do not replace principal jurors shall be discharged after the jury retires to consider its verdict. Each side is entitled to one peremptory challenge in addition to those otherwise allowed by law for each two alternate jurors to be impaneled. The additional peremptory challenge may be used against an alternate juror only, and the other peremptory challenges allowed by law shall not be used against the alternates.
Notes of Decisions
State of Missouri v. Michael E. Amick, 462 S.W.3d 413 (Mo. 2015).
· cites it 20× “The judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded because the trial court violated section 494.485 1 by substituting a discharged alternate juror after the jury had begun its deliberations.”
State v. Nicklasson, 967 S.W.2d 596 (Mo. 1998).
· cites it 9× “Section 494.485, RSMo 1994, permits the trial court to replace jurors who "become or are found to be unable or disqualified to perform their duties.”
State v. Johnson, 968 S.W.2d 123 (Mo. 1998).
· cites it 10× “Section 494.485, RSMo 1994, which addresses the use of alternate jurors, states in pertinent part that "[a]lternate jurors who do not replace principal jurors shall be discharged after the jury retires to consider its verdict.”
State v. Middleton, 995 S.W.2d 443 (Mo. 1999).
· cites it 3× “We found that section 494.485, RSMo 1994, allows such a substitution.”
State of Missouri v. Michael L. Johnson, 513 S.W.3d 360 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 2× “485 in his objection or motion for a new trial, the objection [that the court could not simply substitute an alternate juror more than five hours into jury deliberation because- it was late and would ‘create an enormous amount of error'] plainly and unequivocally infonned the…”
Khoury v. ConAgra Foods, Inc., 368 S.W.3d 189 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 4× “§ 494.485, RSMo 2000. “Alternate jurors, in the order in which they are called, shall replace jurors who, prior to the time the jury retires to *200 consider its verdict, become or are found to be unable or disqualified to perform their duties.”
State v. Cage, 945 S.W.2d 636 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 5× “Black ultimately was the foreman. Mr. Chism was present from that point on.”
State v. Lawson, 876 S.W.2d 770 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994).
“Pursuant to § 494.485, the State and Defendant were each entitled to one peremptory strike with reference to the alternate.”
State v. Robinson, 26 S.W.3d 414 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 2× “Section 494.485. Furthermore, defendants do not have a right to a specific juror or to representation on the jury of a particular point of view.”
Care & Treatment of Martin Reddig v. State, 550 S.W.3d 107 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 2× “5 Section 494.485, governing the procedure for the use of alternate jurors, states: If in any case to be tried before a jury it appears to the court to be appropriate, the court may direct that a number of jurors in addition to the regular jury be called and impaneled to sit as…”
State of Missouri, Plaintiff-respondent v. William Bryce Creutz, Jr. (Mo. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 4× “In Amick, the Supreme Court of Missouri concluded Amick preserved his claim of improper juror substitution in violation of Section 494.485 by objecting to the juror substitution procedure at the time and in his motion for new trial despite never citing the statute to the trial…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.