 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Wood, No. 27372,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, SOUTHERN DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, April 4, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant consented to a search, Fourth Amendment, because his nonverbal behavior at the scene was inconsistent with his testimony at the suppression hearing that he did not intend to give consent; when the officer began searching, defendant did not pull away, and he did not say that he had not consented, nor did he tell the officer to stop.
|
|||||
| Allen v. State, No. 27699,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, SOUTHERN DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, April 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an inmate's sentence imposing probation under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 559.115 was rescinded because he failed to report to jail, the sentencing court exceeded its jurisdiction in amending its earlier sentence because his appearance was not made a condition of the plea agreement and his sentence had already been imposed.
|
|||||
| Wise v. State, No. 27766,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, SOUTHERN DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, April 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Movant's appeal from the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief was dismissed as the motion court lost jurisdiction to reopen the proceedings when movant took no action within the 30-day period of Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 75.01; because the motion court jurisdiction, the appellate court lacked jurisdiction to review it.
|
|||||
| State v. Bennett, No. 27464,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, SOUTHERN DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, April 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting a tape of two 911 calls containing statements by a robbery victim because such statements qualified under the excited utterance exception to hearsay. It was not plain error under the Confrontation Clause to admit the 911 calls because the statements contained within were non-testimonial.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
