433 S.W.3d 483
Mo. Ct. App.2014Background
- Appellant Carl Cozart appeals a probate-division judgment committing him to DMH as an SVP after a jury trial.
- Appellant’s SVP predicates include rape, sodomy, indecent exposure, and related offenses with younger victims from Oklahoma and Missouri.
- Appellant failed MO-SOP twice due to anger, noncooperation, and rule violations; prior offenses include kidnapping and violent sexual crimes.
- Psychologists diagnosed paraphilia NOS, nonconsent, exhibitionism, and antisocial personality disorder, leading to SVP classification.
- Risk assessments (Static 99R, Static 2002R, MnSOST-R) indicated high risk of reoffending if not confined; DSM-based justification supported by experts.
- Probate division admitted the evidence; the jury found SVP by clear and convincing evidence; two post-trial issues are raised on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether mistrial denial was an abuse of discretion | Cozart | State | No abuse; remedy sought was not timely; instructions to disregard were given. |
| Whether evidence show mental abnormality supports SVP finding | Cozart | State | Paraphilia NOS, nonconsent qualifies as mental abnormality; sufficient clear and convincing evidence. |
Key Cases Cited
- Croxton v. State, 293 S.W.3d 39 (Mo.App.E.D.2009) (mistrial discretion and prejudice assessment)
- Hendrix, 883 S.W.2d 935 (Mo.App.W.D.1994) (preservation of mistrial claims; remedy timing)
- Dunn v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 909 S.W.2d 728 (Mo.App.S.D.1995) (timeliness of requesting mistrial matters)
- McMillin v. Union Electric Co., 820 S.W.2d 352 (Mo.App.W.D.1991) (waiver when no further relief requested at time of objection)
- Hacker v. Quinn Concrete Co., Inc., 857 S.W.2d 402 (Mo.App.W.D.1993) (no preserved error when relief not sought timely)
- Welch v. Burlington Northern Railroad Co., 807 S.W.2d 226 (Mo.App.E.D.1991) (objection sustained; failure to request further relief)
- State v. Lyons, 951 S.W.2d 584 (Mo.banc 1997) (jury generally presumed to follow court instructions)
- In re Parnell, 390 S.W.3d 849 (Mo.App.S.D.2013) (paraphilia NOS, nonconsent as mental abnormality supporting SVP)
- Dunivan v. State, 247 S.W.3d 77 (Mo.App.S.D.2008) (paraphilia NOS supports mental abnormality)