85.610. Marshal — powers. — The marshal in cities of the fourth class shall be chief of police, and shall have power at all times to make or order an arrest, with proper process, for any offense against the laws of the city or of the state, and to keep the offender in the city prison or other proper place to prevent his escape until a trial can be had before the proper officer, unless such offender shall give a good and sufficient bond for his appearance for trial. The marshal shall also have power to make arrests without process, in all cases in which any offenses against the laws of the city or of the state shall be committed in his presence.
Notes of Decisions
City of Fredericktown v. Bell, 761 S.W.2d 715 (Mo. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 9× “Appellant argues that such arrests are valid on the basis of sections 85.610 and 544.216, RSMo 1986, which grant municipal officers the authority to make warrantless arrests in certain situations.”
State v. Galazin, 58 S.W.3d 500 (Mo. 2001).
· cites it 2× “[6] §§ 85.610, 85.620, RSMo 2000. [7] See §§ 80.”
State v. Renfrow, 224 S.W.3d 27 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 5× “(quoting section 85.610, RSMo 1949). An exception exits, however, where a law enforcement officer is in fresh pursuit of a person who has committed any criminal offense or violation of a municipal or county ordinance.”
State v. Murphy, 358 S.W.3d 126 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 4× “I am left then with the question of lawwhether a conviction for speeding can occur as a result of a ticket issued by a person acting in the capacity of a private citizen.”
Hacker v. City of Potosi, 340 S.W.2d 166 (Mo. Ct. App. 1960).
· cites it 7× “Under this section he may arrest, with proper process, for any offense against the laws of the city or state. It is also provided that he may make arrests without process, in all cases in which any offense against the laws of the city or the state shall be committed in his…”
Barnes v. City of Lawson, 820 S.W.2d 598 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 3× “Section 85.610, RSMo 1986, authorizes the marshall in fourth class cities to make and order arrests.”
City of Advance v. Maryland Cas. Co., 302 S.W.2d 28 (Mo. 1957).
· cites it 3× “That section, defining the powers of marshals of cities of the fourth class, of which class is the City •of Advance, provides: “The marshal in cities of the fourth class shall be chief of police, and shall have power at all times to make or order an arrest, with proper process,…”
State ex rel. Beeler v. City of Raytown, 453 S.W.2d 672 (Mo. Ct. App. 1970).
· cites it 3× “Section 85.610, RSMo 1959, V.A. M.S. In 1967, relator was entitled to a vacation of fifteen (15) working days under respondent’s Ordinance 105.”
State v. Jacks, 462 S.W.2d 744 (Mo. 1970).
· cites it 2× “(He could arrest for the misdemeanor of not having a valid driver’s license under § 85.610, RSMo 1959, V.A.M.S.) It is apparent, then, that appellant under the evidence was guilty of assaulting a police officer who was under the protection of § 557,215, supra.”
State v. Nichols, 628 S.W.2d 732 (Mo. Ct. App. 1982).
“Since the arrest took place outside the city limits, defendant argues that § 85.610, dealing with the powers of a marshal of a city of the fourth class, did not constitute authority for making the arrest in his capacity as marshal.”
State v. Neher, 726 S.W.2d 362 (Mo. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 2× “1957), it was held that a police officer, the city marshal of a fourth class city (such as Norborne here) was not em *364 powered to go beyond the limits to effectuate an arrest without process under the statute, now § 85.610 RSMo 1978. Albeit that Conrad was instructed by the…”
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.