|
| |
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 Courts -
Missouri - April 4, 2006
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Lane v. State, No. ED85988,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, April 4, 2006, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: An order denying defendant's motion for postconviction relief after he was convicted of first-degree statutory rape, four counts of statutory sodomy, two counts of incest, and two counts of abuse of a child was upheld where no error of law appeared. Defendant's claims of error were without merit.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Nickel v. G.J. Grewe, Inc., No. ED87519,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE, April 4, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Where a decision of the Missouri Labor and Industrial Relations Commission became final 10 days after it was mailed on December 2, 2005, and the claimant's notice of appeal was not postmarked until January 11, 2006, the notice was untimely pursuant to Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 288.200.2, 288.210, and 288.240 (2000) and the appeal had to be dismissed.
|
|
| |
Norfolk v. State, WD64831,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, April 4, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Motion court clearly erred in rejecting appellant's Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 24.035 claim that trial court lacked jurisdiction to revoke his probation and execute prison sentence because probation had already terminated; Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 29.13, 74.01, 74.06, 75.01, and Mo. Rev. Stat. § 559.036 (2000) did not allow the trial court to revisit probation issue.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
