Zel Fischer

In re Robert J. Branson v. Michael Shewmaker, Warden, South Central Correctional Center

Supreme Court of Missouri · 2025-04-29

Robert J. Branson petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his life sentence for the class A felony of first-degree child molestation, claiming an insufficient factual basis supported his Alford guilty plea under the version of the statute in effect at the time of the offense. The Supreme Court of Missouri denied habeas relief, holding that Branson had waived the claim by failing to raise it in his Rule 24.035 postconviction motion and that the claim did not qualify for any exception to the procedural default rule. The court reasoned that Branson knowingly and voluntarily pleaded guilty to the class A felony while facing a potential life sentence, creating no jurisdictional defect or manifest injustice that would permit habeas review of the procedurally defaulted sentencing claim.

criminal lawprocedure

State of Missouri v. Brian K. Heathcock

Supreme Court of Missouri · 2025-03-18

In this case, Brian K. Heathcock was convicted in Warren County of first-degree tampering with a vehicle, felony resisting arrest, and tampering with a victim after he took his girlfriend's car and led police on a chase. He had previously pleaded guilty in Montgomery County to first-degree tampering based on the same vehicle but an earlier incident of driving it. Heathcock appealed, claiming the Warren County tampering charge violated double jeopardy protections under the Fifth Amendment and Missouri law because it involved the same offense. The Supreme Court of Missouri affirmed the convictions, holding that the two tampering charges arose from distinct acts separated by time and location rather than a single continuous offense. The court reasoned that double jeopardy prohibits multiple punishments only for the same act, and separate instances of unlawful operation qualify as different crimes even under the same statute.

criminal lawprocedure

D.J., by and through his Next Friend, R.J. v. First Student, Inc.

Supreme Court of Missouri · 2025-02-28

In this case, a fourth-grade student sued a school bus company after being struck by an unidentified hit-and-run driver while crossing the street after being dropped off at the wrong corner due to the substitute driver's lack of an updated route sheet. The jury found the company negligent in failing to provide proper route information and awarded $1.3 million in damages. The Missouri Supreme Court vacated the judgment, holding that the criminal act of the third-party driver constituted an intervening and superseding event that broke the chain of proximate causation from any actions or omissions by the bus company.

torts & liabilityprocedure

Joe David Hudson v. Joplin Regional Stockyards, Inc.

Supreme Court of Missouri · 2024-12-23

This case involved an appeal by Joplin Regional Stockyards (JRS) from a circuit court order reviving a 2013 judgment based on a 2005 workers' compensation settlement with employee Joe David Hudson. The settlement provided an $80,000 lump-sum payment for certain disability and past medical issues, with future medical expenses left open. Hudson sought to revive the judgment in 2022, claiming it remained unsatisfied, while JRS argued it had been paid and moved for relief from the judgment. The Supreme Court of Missouri held that JRS had standing to appeal and reversed the revival order, finding the judgment satisfied because the lump sum had been fully paid and any future medical determinations fall under the exclusive authority of the Division of Workers' Compensation rather than circuit court enforcement of the partial settlement judgment.

labor & employmentprocedure

Prosecuting Attorney, 21st Judicial Circuit, ex rel. Marcellus Williams, Movant/Petitioner v. State of Missouri, and State of Missouri v. Marcellus Williams

Supreme Court of Missouri · 2024-09-23

The case concerns a motion by the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney under Missouri statute § 547.031 to vacate Marcellus Williams' 2001 first-degree murder conviction and death sentence, based on claims of actual innocence and constitutional errors including ineffective assistance of counsel and racial bias in jury selection. After reviewing the motion, the circuit court denied relief, and the Supreme Court of Missouri affirmed that judgment on appeal. The court held that there was no clear and convincing evidence of actual innocence or constitutional error undermining the original trial judgment, noting that all such claims had been rejected in prior state and federal proceedings over more than two decades and that the prosecutor had abandoned key innocence arguments. The court also overruled a related motion to stay Williams' execution as moot.

criminal lawprocedure

State of Missouri v. Marcellus Williams

Supreme Court of Missouri · 2024-07-12

In State of Missouri v. Marcellus Williams, the Missouri Supreme Court addressed Williams' motion to withdraw a June 2024 warrant of execution setting a September 2024 date for his first-degree murder conviction and death sentence. The court overruled the motion, holding that the pending § 547.031 motion filed by the St. Louis County prosecutor to vacate the conviction—based on prior DNA testing claims of actual innocence and ineffective assistance—did not automatically require staying the execution. The core reasoning was that Rule 30.30(c) authorizes the warrant once postconviction remedies are exhausted, the prosecutor's action is not a defendant-filed postconviction motion under Rule 29.15, and Williams failed to demonstrate the equitable factors for injunctive relief; the court had previously rejected the same DNA and related claims in habeas proceedings.

criminal lawprocedure

Affiliations

Decision record

Zel Fischer

Affiliations

Decision record