Case summaries for June 5 – June 11
Criminal
No Plain Error Review
During sentencing phase, circuit court received testimony without objection from defendant, that defendant will be dangerous in the future, and that defendant deserves at least the maximum sentences that the law provides. “Sua sponte action should be exercised only in exceptional circumstances [because u]ninvited interference by the trial judge . . . risks injecting the judge into the role of a participant and invites trial error.” Court of Appeals presumes that circuit judged ignored inadmissible evidence, and appellant did not show that any manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice occurred, so Court of Appeals declines plain error review.
STATE OF MISSOURI, Plaintiff-Respondent v. MICHAEL GILES, JR., Defendant-Appellant
Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District – SD36122
DWI
Innocent Explanations Do Not Negate Probable Cause
On judicial review of a license suspension by the Director of Revenue, the Director’s elements include information that the driver was driving with blood alcohol concentration. The information must rise to the level of probable cause, meaning that the information represents “a fair probability” in the eyes of “a prudent, cautious, and trained police officer [.]” The absence of some signs of intoxication does not negate the presence of others, and “innocent explanations for [driver]’s behavior” do not negate the facts that establish probable cause. Judgment restoring driving privileges reversed with directions to affirm suspension.
THOMAS MICHAEL CERUTTI, Petitioner-Respondent v. DIRECTOR OF REVENUE, STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent-Appellant
Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District – SD36355