Case summaries for Feb. 6-12, 2026

Criminal | Family | Post-conviction

Criminal

Victim inconsistencies resolved in deliberation 
The elements of plain error included an obvious error that was outcome-determinative. No witness, even an expert, could testify to another witness’s credibility. The State’s expert testified that physical evidence supported the victim’s description of the events alleged, and the circuit court did not intervene sua sponte. That testimony did not constitute a comment on the victim’s credibility and defense counsel used it to strategic advantage. Those facts did not describe plain error so the Missouri Court of Appeals declined plain error review. “[T]he testimony of young victims about sensitive matters commonly contains some variations, contradictions, or lapses in memory [that] are matters for the fact-finder to resolve.” The jury’s questions during deliberation showed that such resolution occurred. The Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions. 
STATE OF MISSOURI, Plaintiff-Respondent v. CEDRIC TERRIL PACE, Respondent-Appellant 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Southern District – SD38716

Family

Appellant’s brief abandoned theories 
The appellant challenged the circuit court’s ruling on the respondent’s income as against the weight of the evidence but failed to include the evidence supporting that finding. The appellant challenged the circuit court’s ruling on child support as a misapplication of the law requiring a downward adjustment for visitation, but no downward adjustment was required when, as here, the appellant did not exercise visitation. The appellant challenged the circuit court’s ruling denying an abatement of child support, alleging that the circuit court excluded supporting evidence, but the record refuted that allegation. Omitting a preservation statement also abandoned review for all but plain error. Plain error’s elements included an obviously erroneous circuit court ruling that resulted in a manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice. The circuit court’s findings favoring the appellant did not support the award but the appellant did not show a manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice. The appellant challenged the circuit court’s ruling on attorney fees as an abuse of discretion but could not show a manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice, especially having omitted the transcript.
(Overview summary) 
M.D.M, Appellant, v. A.W.S., Respondent 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Eastern District - ED113141

Post-conviction

No new claim on appeal 
The movant claimed ineffective assistance of plea counsel. The motion alleged that trial counsel said that movant would be eligible for long-term treatment. On appeal, the movant alleged that plea counsel promised that the movant would receive long-term treatment. The latter claim did not preserve the former claim, but the Missouri Court of Appeals ruled on the appeal anyway. The record refuted that claim by showing that the colloquy at the plea hearing included repeated explanations of why the movant was not eligible for long-term treatment. The circuit court did not err in denying relief, and the Court of Appeals affirmed that judgment. 
DIECKON T. CARDIN, Movant-Appellant v. STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent-Respondent 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Southern District - SD39041

Waiver of testimony was knowing and voluntary 
Criminal defendants had the right to testify, only the criminal defendants could waive that right, and waivers had to be knowing and voluntary. The record from the criminal trial and the evidentiary hearing on the motion showed that the movant’s waiver met those standards. When a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel included failure to call a witness, the elements included testimony that would have unequivocally supported a defense, which the movant did not show. The circuit court did not err in denying relief, and the Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed that judgment. 
(Overview summary) 
Derrie S. Williams, Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Eastern District - ED113255

Mental disease or defect claim unsupported 
The elements of a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel included substandard performance and resulting prejudice. When founded on the failure to investigate and call a witness, the motion must allege what the witness would have shown. The defendants could reduce culpable mental states with evidence of diminished capacity like a mental disease or defect. The movant’s mental disease or defect appeared in the motion’s allegations, but an allegation of how the mental disease or defect would have negated the mental state alleged in the criminal action was absent, rendering the allegations merely speculative. The allegation of prejudice was merely conclusory. The circuit court did not err in denying relief, and the Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed that judgment. 
(Overview summary) 
Daniel T. Williams, Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent. 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Eastern District - ED113233