Mo. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 565
Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 565.110 (2026)

Kidnapping, first degree, penalty

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  565.110.  Kidnapping, first degree, penalty. — 1.  A person commits the offense of kidnapping in the first degree if he or she unlawfully removes another person without his or her consent from the place where he or she is found or unlawfully confines another person without his or her consent for a substantial period, for the purpose of:

  (1)  Holding that person for ransom or reward, or for any other act to be performed or not performed for the return or release of that person; or

  (2)  Using the person as a shield or as a hostage; or

  (3)  Interfering with the performance of any governmental or political function; or

  (4)  Facilitating the commission of any felony or flight thereafter; or

  (5)  Inflicting physical injury on or terrorizing the victim or another.

  2.  The offense of kidnapping in the first degree is a class A felony unless committed under subdivision (4) or (5) of subsection 1 of this section in which cases it is a class B felony.

­­--------

(L. 1977 S.B. 60, A.L. 2004 H.B. 1487, A.L. 2014 S.B. 491)

Effective 1-01-17

CROSS REFERENCE:

Conviction of offense, on release registration requirements and penalty for failure to comply (Megan's Law), 589.400 to 589.426

(1981) Kidnapping and rape were separate offenses and defendant thus was not punished twice for same offense because confinement and movement of victim were not incidental to commission of rape but increased risk of harm and danger to victim. State v. Stewart (A.), 615 S.W.2d 600.

(1993) For purposes of definition of "forcible compulsion" in section 556.061, age of victim, relationship to defendant and testimony of victim that defendant guided her head and mouth, or that defendant threatened to ground victim, was not sufficient evidence to establish that victim was in reasonable fear of death, serious physical injury or kidnapping under this section as required by conviction for forcible sodomy under section 566.060, RSMo.  State v. Daleske, 866 S.W.2d 476 (Mo. App. W.D.).

(1994) Although, under Missouri statute, crime of kidnapping does not require proof of injury and where kidnapping is not intrinsically violent, crime entails serious potential risk of physical injury to another based on requirement that kidnapping be without person's consent; therefore, kidnapping under Missouri law is violent felony for purposes of enhanced sentencing under federal law.  United States v. Phelps, 17 F.3d 1334 (10th Cir.).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 386 cases (11 in the last 5 years), 1978–2025 · leading case: State v. Porter, 241 S.W.3d 385 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Porter, 241 S.W.3d 385 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 44× “Daniel Porter was convicted after a jury trial of two counts of kidnapping his own children to terrorize their mother in violation of section 565.110. 1 He was also convicted of two counts of parental kidnapping in violation of section 565.”
State v. Sistrunk, 414 S.W.3d 592 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 22× “015, and kidnapping, in violation of Section 565.110. On appeal, Defendant alleges the trial court erred in: (1) denying Defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal as to first-degree robbery and ACA because the evidence was insufficient to sustain the convictions; and (2)…”
State v. Taylor, 929 S.W.2d 209 (Mo. 1996). · cites it 6× “015, RSMo 1986; kidnapping, section 565.110, RSMo 1986; and forcible rape, section 566.”
United States v. Marlon Flores-Granados, 783 F.3d 487 (4th Cir. 2015). · cites it 5× “25(1); Mo.Rev. Stat. § 565.110(1); Neb RevStat. § 28-313; N.”
State v. Olds, 831 S.W.2d 713 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 9× “120, RSMo 1986; (3) one count of kidnapping, Section 565.110, RSMo 1986; (4) two counts of armed criminal action, Section 571.”
State v. Agnew, 214 S.W.3d 398 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 10× “Defendant, Wayne Agnew, appeals from the trial court’s judgment entered on a jury verdict finding him guilty of kidnapping, in violation of Section 565.110 RSMo (2000), armed criminal action, in violation of Section 571.”
State v. Arnold, 216 S.W.3d 203 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 11× “Section 565.110, RSMo Cum.Supp.2004 (effective June 17, 2004).”
Spier v. State, 174 S.W.3d 539 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 10× “The State, by information, charged the movant with four counts of kidnapping, in violation of section 565.110, RSMo.2000, 1 and four counts of interference with custody, in violation of section 565.”
State v. Samuels, 492 P.3d 404 (Kan. 2021). · cites it 7× “The Missouri crime of felony first-degree kidnapping, Mo. Rev. Stat. § 565.110 (2004), is comparable to kidnapping as defined by K.”
State v. Kilgore, 771 S.W.2d 57 (Mo. 1989). · cites it 4× “I The murder victim, Marilyn Wilkins, age fifty-four, was employed at Cristos restaurant in St.”
State v. Stewart, 615 S.W.2d 600 (Mo. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 7× “Appellant was by the verdict of a jury convicted of kidnapping a Class B felony charged (Count I) under § 565.110 RSMo 1978, and of rape, also a Class B felony charged (Count II) under § 566.”
State v. Jackson, 703 S.W.2d 30 (Mo. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 6× “Louis, of kidnapping, § 565.110 RSMo 1978; forcible rape, § 566.”
Show all 386 citing cases →
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 565.110(1) — 3 cases
United States v. Marlon Flores-Granados, 783 F.3d 487 (4th Cir. 2015). “25(1); Mo.Rev. Stat. § 565.110(1); Neb RevStat. § 28-313; N.”
United States v. De Jesus Ventura, 565 F.3d 870 (D.C. Cir. 2009).
State of Missouri v. Richard E. Calvin (Mo. Ct. App. 2025).
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 565.110(1)(5) — 1 case
State v. Lujan, 911 P.2d 562 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1995).
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 565.110(2) — 1 case
State of Missouri vs. David Shawn Williams (Mo. Ct. App. 2025).
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 565.110(4) — 3 cases
State v. Hayes, 637 S.W.2d 33 (Mo. Ct. App. 1982).
State v. Salley, 911 S.W.2d 685 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995).
State of Missouri vs. David Shawn Williams (Mo. Ct. App. 2025).
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.