 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| State v. Groves, WD 64695,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, January 24, 2006, Order Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State v. Metcalf, No. ED85803,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, January 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State failed to produce sufficient evidence to convict defendant of possession of a controlled substance, in violation of Mo. Rev. Stat. § 195.202 (2000), beyond a reasonable doubt where although he was in hotel room with wife when residue was found, wife pled guilty to possession and only she had actual physical control of item containing residue.
|
|||||
| State v. Smith, No. ED85631,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, January 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of defendant's motion for new trial was proper as defendant's claim that he had receipts for four of the seven items that he was convicted of stealing was not properly preserved as he did not raise the issue in his Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 30.20 motion, it was subject to plain error review, and it would not have completely exonerated defendant.
|
|||||
| State v. Taylor, WD 64638,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, January 24, 2006 Order Filed;
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State v. Vinson, No. ED86024,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, January 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The granting of defendant's motion to dismiss was improper pursuant to the "anti-shuttling" provision of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD), Mo. Rev. Stat. § 217.490. His voluntary and affirmative action of posting bond and causing his return to federal custody waived his protections under the IAD's anti-shuttling provision.
|
|||||
| State v. Zeigler, No. ED85998,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, January 24, 2006, Order Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Stott v. State, No. 26748,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, SOUTHERN DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, January 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Movant's request for post-conviction relief pursuant to Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 29.15 was properly denied because movant failed to show that counsel was ineffective for failing to call an expert witness. Expert would have only marginally impeached interviewing technique employed on alleged child victim; counsel exercised reasonable trial strategy.
|
|||||
| Sutton v. State, No. ED86186,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, January 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Turner v. City of Independence, WD 64998 (consolidated with WD 65048),
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, January 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As property owners' alleged that a city approved rezoning and development would adversely impact their properties, they had standing to challenge the rezoning. However, while the owners presented evidence of private detriment, sufficient evidence supported the trial court's conclusion that public benefit significantly outweighed the detriment.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
