Case summaries for November 1-7, 2024

Criminal | Civil | Local government | Orders of protection | Post-conviction | Real estate

Criminal

Enhanced sentences explained 
The defendant alleged that the circuit court never swore the jury in, but the docket sheet checkbox for "jury sworn" showed otherwise, so the Missouri Court of Appeals declined plain error review. Statutes enhanced sentences on a finding of prior, persistent, or dangerous offender status. A single previous offense could support more than one such status. The statutes described, and the circuit court found, “discrete and distinguishable scenarios wherein a trial court has the general authority to impose an enhanced term of imprisonment at an enhanced range of punishment expressly authorized by statute." 
(Overview summary) 
State of Missouri vs. Solowmenn James Warren 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Western District - WD86183

Evidence of prior conviction had multiple purposes 
The state charged the defendant with murder in the first degree by striking victim with a vehicle and unlawful use of a firearm by being a felon in possession. To show the absence of mistake in the former and felon status for the latter, evidence of the defendant’s previous conviction for purposely striking someone with his vehicle was admissible. Past threats by victim in the presence of third persons, but not to defendant, were not relevant to the defendant’s state of mind. Therefore, the circuit court did not err in quashing subpoenas to those persons. 
(Overview summary) 
State of Missouri vs. Shane Chesher 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Western District – WD86124 Consolidated with WD86125

Four death sentences affirmed 
The circuit court did not err in striking a venire person who could not fairly consider the death penalty. Sequential shooting of the victims supported a finding of deliberation. Evidence describing the defendant’s flight, including further offenses, was relevant to the defendant’s consciousness of guilt. Closing argument that asked jurors to imagine the victims’ thoughts did not constitute improper personalization. The context of a circuit court statement dispelled any suggestion of religious bias. “[V]arious inconsequential matters that seemingly merited neither an objection at trial nor a claim on appeal” did not inflame the jury or cause it to return a verdict unsupported by the evidence. Body cam videos were relevant and the defendant could not show any prejudice from them among over 1,000 other exhibits. “Portrayals of gruesome crimes necessarily will be gruesome, and this prejudicial effect is not so unfair as to render the otherwise logically and legally relevant evidence inadmissible, particularly when (as here) the identity of the killer was not disputed.” Statutes allowed impact statements from the victims, the victims’ families, and “others,” including law enforcement officers. Overwhelming and undisputed evidence supported aggravating circumstances. The sentences were not disproportional to other cases similar. 
(Overview summary) 
State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Richard D. Emery, Appellant. 
Supreme Court of Missouri – SC99869

Traffic stop lawfully extended 
Appellate review of the circuit court’s ruling on a motion to suppress addressed the record from both the suppression hearing and at trial. Consistently with the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment, a traffic violation justified a traffic stop. The detention lawfully lasted until a citation was written and could have lasted longer only if the officer developed a reasonable and articulable suspicion of further unlawful activity. The defendant’s incomplete compliance with law enforcement officer’s directives, false statements, nervous demeanor, and attempt to conceal or destroy evidence justified extending the detention for a drug-sniffing dog. Officers legally searched and seized evidence discovered from that search. 
(Overview summary) 
State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. Chad Thomas, Appellant. 
Supreme Court of Missouri – SC100469

Age established 
The elements of kidnapping in the first degree included restraint for a “substantial” time with exposure to a danger other than a contemporaneous offense that the kidnapping facilitated. The state established those elements with evidence that the defendant confined the victim at gunpoint while committing statutory sodomy in the second degree. The elements of sodomy in the second degree included the victim’s age, which the state established through the victim’s testimony on the year of her birth, the year in which the relevant events occurred, her exact age at that time, and corroborative events. Plain error in the admission of evidence required that the challenged ruling was outcome-determinative, which was impossible when the disputed evidence was already in the record. 
(Overview summary) 
State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. Robert L. Sims Jr., Appellant. 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Eastern District - ED111981

Civil

Good cause rejected 
Rule allowed a circuit court to set aside a default judgment on a verified motion filed within a reasonable time, but no more than a year, showing a meritorious defense to the defaulted claim and good cause for the default. Good cause did not include recklessness. And because the only way to serve notice on a corporation is through an agent, service on an agent was service on the corporate defendant, and defendant offered no evidence of its agent’s failure to forward notice. The circuit court was free to disbelieve the allegations in an affidavit and the Missouri Court of Appeals deferred to that credibility determination. 
(Overview summary) 
Brian S. Wetzel vs. Root Insurance Company 
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District - WD86869

Referenced documents were necessary for summary judgment 
Rule governing summary judgment provided that a movant party could prevail without a trial by showing that the law entitled that party to a favorable ruling on facts established beyond genuine dispute. To establish such facts, the rule allowed an affidavit, but only if the movant included any document relied on. The motion referred to an affidavit that recited reliance on records not included. On such a summary judgment record, the non-movant did not even have to respond to the motion. The Missouri Court of Appeals reversed the summary judgment. 
(Overview summary) 
U.S. Bank Trust, N.A., Trustee vs. Danny B. Pratte, et al. 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Western District – WD86866

Defendant estopped from raising defective service
Rule provided an action to set aside a void judgment. A judgment was void if service of process did not occur as rules provided but defective service constituted a defect only as to personal jurisdiction, which was subject to estoppel. Grounds for estoppel arose when the defendant filed a motion to modify the default judgment’s provisions and expressly argued that the circuit court had jurisdiction over the judgment. The Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to set aside. 
(Overview summary) 
Francis Wolo, Respondent, vs. Christina Wolo, Appellant. 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Eastern District - ED112428

Local government

County classification case re-transferred 
Constitutional provisions required a statutory classification system for counties, which statutes defined by assessed valuation, with one argued exception. Whether that exception constituted a violation of the constitutional requirement, the plaintiff argued but did not allege in circuit court, and so neither raised nor preserved the matter, leaving the issue outside of the Supreme Court of Missouri’s exclusive jurisdiction. Re-transferred from the Court to the Missouri Court of Appeals. 
(Overview summary) 
Jessica Goodman, Saline County Assessor, Appellant vs. Saline County Commission, et al., Respondents. 
Supreme Court of Missouri – SC100554

Orders of Protection

Full order reversed for lack of notice 
Rule allowed relief from a judgment issued without due process of law. Due process of law included notice of a reset hearing date on a full order of protection. Actions for an order of protection did not require a responsive pleading, so failure to file a responsive pleading did not result in default. The judgment issuing a full order of protection was therefore void and the circuit court erred in denying the motion to set aside the judgment. The Court of Appeals reversed the judgment and remanded it for a hearing. 
(Overview summary) 
C.B., Respondent, vs. G.B., Appellant. 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Eastern District - ED112625

Post-conviction

No right to a ruling on superseded claim 
Rule allowed a circuit court to set aside a judgment that was void for violation of due process. No due process violation occurred in the circuit court’s failure to address a claim in the initial motion because the amended motion superseded the initial motion. Neither a circuit court nor the Missouri Court of Appeals had authority to amend a judgment already affirmed in the Court of Appeals without a favorable ruling on a motion, filed in the Court of Appeals, to recall the mandate. The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment denying the movant’s motion to amend judgment. 
(Overview summary) 
Maurice T. Davis vs. State of Missouri 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Western District – WD86663

No meritless motion to suppress necessary 
The elements of a claim for ineffective assistance of trial counsel included substandard performance, which reasonable trial strategy negated. Trial strategy included whether to file a motion to suppress and never included a meritless motion. To challenge an arresting officer’s traffic stop after informants and the officer observed dangerous driving would have been meritless. 
(Overview summary) 
Cedric Dewayne Mack vs. State of Missouri 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Western District – WD86527

Real estate

Notice of redemption rights to beneficiary was necessary 
Statutes governing tax sales required the buyer to give notice of redemption rights to “any person who holds a . . . publicly recorded claim upon that real estate [.]” Publicly recorded claims included the designation of a beneficiary on a beneficiary deed. The beneficiary’s transfer gave transferees standing to challenge the sale. Statute also entitled the buyers to an amount for improvements to the property but the buyers did not ask for any such amount in circuit court. The Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for the transferees. 
(Overview summary) 
Diana J. Thompson, et al. vs. Heirs of Kathryn L. Metcalf, et al. 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Western District – WD86635

Perpetual renewal okay 
Perpetual options to renew a lease constituted an exception to the rule against perpetuities, and to the rule against unreasonable restraints on alienation, and were enforceable. Such options were unambiguously conferred under an “indefinite” and “infinite” extensions. “[W]e remind [lessors] that the freedom to contract includes the freedom to make bad decisions.” Judgment, holding the lease contract unenforceable, reversed. 
(Overview summary) 
West 39th Street, LLC vs. Lina, LLC 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Western District – WD86445 (Consolidated with WD86575, WD86597, WD86707, WD86840

Certiorari was remedy for board of adjustment decision 
On a claim under the Declaratory Judgment Act, the elements included the presence of a justiciable controversy over legally protectable interests that is ripe for judicial determination and the absence of an adequate remedy at law. An adequate remedy at law was available for a decision of a Board of Adjustment was provided by statute: a writ of certiorari. And an allegation that the Board employed a tradition of aldermanic courtesy did not constitute a a justiciable controversy over legally protectable interests that is ripe for judicial determination. The circuit court did not err in dismissing the petition for failure to state a claim for declaratory relief. 
(Overview summary) 
Double AA Market, LLC, Appellant, v. City of St. Louis, MO, Respondent. 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Eastern District - ED112466