84.710. Police force — officers of state — powers to arrest. — 1. The members of the police force appointed in pursuance hereof are hereby declared to be officers of the state of Missouri and of the city for which such commissioners are appointed.
2. They shall have power within the city or on public property of the city beyond the corporate limits thereof to arrest, on view, any person they see violating or whom they have reason to suspect of having violated any law of the state or ordinance of the city. They shall have power to arrest and hold, without warrant, for a period of time not exceeding twenty-four hours, persons found within the city or on public property of the city beyond the corporate limits thereof charged with having committed felonies in other states, and who are reported to be fugitives from justice. They shall also have the power to stop any person abroad whenever there is reasonable ground to suspect that he is committing, has committed or is about to commit a crime and demand of him his name, address, business abroad and whither he is going. When stopping or detaining a suspect, they may search him for a dangerous weapon whenever they have reasonable ground to believe they are in danger from the possession of such dangerous weapon by the suspect. No unreasonable force shall be used in detaining or arresting any person, but such force as may be necessary may be used when there is no other apparent means of making an arrest or preventing an escape and only after the peace officer has made every reasonable effort to advise the person that he is the peace officer engaged in making arrest.
3. Any person who has been arrested without a warrant may be released, without being taken before a judge, by the officer in charge of the police station whenever the officer is satisfied that there is no ground for making complaint against him, or when the person was arrested for a misdemeanor and will sign a satisfactory agreement to appear in court at the time designated.
Notes of Decisions
Rustici v. Weidemeyer, 673 S.W.2d 762 (Mo. 1984).
· cites it 8× “" Section 84.710, RSMo 1978, empowers police officers in Kansas City to arrest any person "whom they have reason to suspect of having violated any law of the state or ordinance of the city.”
State v. Edwards, 317 S.W.2d 441 (Mo. 1958).
· cites it 6× “Heinen immediately went in search of defendant and found him in an automobile on 12th Street with a known addict in his car.”
State v. Waldrup, 331 S.W.3d 668 (Mo. 2011).
· cites it 2× “” See also section 84.710 (if he possesses *675 reasonable suspicion, an officer may demand a suspect’s “name, address, business abroad and whither he is going.”
Palcher v. J.C. Nichols Co., 783 S.W.2d 166 (Mo. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 8× “The defendant fashioned affirmative defense Instruction Number 8 after the text of § 84.710, RSMo 1986, which defines the powers of members of the police force of Kansas City to stop and arrest: They shall have power within the city or on public property of the city beyond the…”
Settle v. State, 679 S.W.2d 310 (Mo. Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 3× “Kansas City police officers, are both municipal and state officers, and are empowered to arrest for both ordinance and state violations “within the city or on public property of the city beyond the corporate limits thereof_” Section 84.”
Kansas City v. Fulton, 533 S.W.2d 677 (Mo. Ct. App. 1976).
· cites it 3× “2d 280, 286 [9] (Mo.App.1966). The further provision of that statute [§ 84.”
State v. Camper, 353 S.W.2d 676 (Mo. 1962).
· cites it 3× “Section 84.710, RSMo 1949, V.A.M.S. In the course of this lawful arrest one of the officers saw a metal cash box and two screwdrivers through the car window.”
State v. Wiley, 412 S.W.2d 485 (Mo. 1967).
· cites it 2× “Nichols when he showed them the accused on the way to his car and described the items which he accused appellant of stealing.”
State v. Eaton, 504 S.W.2d 12 (Mo. 1973).
“§ 84.710, subd. 2, RSMo 1969, V.A.M.S. Having information from the dispatcher that the license plate was reported stolen the officers were performing a legitimate investigative function when they stopped the automobile to check the identity of the operator and his right to use…”
Citicasters, Inc. v. McCaskill, 883 F. Supp. 1282 (W.D. Mo. 1995).
· cites it 2× “Defendants claim that this lawsuit in reality is a suit against the state, which has not waived its sovereign immunity. Thus, defendants contend that dismissal is appropriate.”
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 84.710(1) — 1 case
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 84.710(2) — 2 cases
Kansas City v. Fulton, 533 S.W.2d 677 (Mo. Ct. App. 1976).
“2d 280, 286 [9] (Mo.App.1966). The further provision of that statute [§ 84.”
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.