State of Missouri v. Darius Morgan, 480 S.W.3d 349

Late-night gas-station robbery: victim (with a two-year-old niece) was threatened with a revolver, surrendered $50 and car keys; robbers drove off in victim’s car; incident lasted ~3 minutes.
Police located the car within 30 minutes, chased and stopped it; three men (including Darius Morgan) were in the car and arrested.
Three sequential physical lineups were conducted; the victim failed to identify anyone in the first two lineups but immediately identified Morgan in the third, saying he recognized Morgan’s face in a “split second.”
Morgan was charged with first-degree robbery and armed criminal action; jury convicted; court sentenced Morgan to concurrent terms (15 and 10 years).
On appeal Morgan raised three issues: (1) pretrial and in-court identifications were impermissibly suggestive/unreliable; (2) exclusion of an officer’s opinion about the lineup quality; and (3) plain error in classifying him a prior offender because the indictment did not plead that status.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of pretrial and in-court identifications	Identification was valid; trial court discretion to admit when not suggestive and reliable	Morgan: lineup was unduly suggestive (reused distractors, clothing/armband/freckles) and in-court ID tainted	Court: lineup not impermissibly suggestive; victim identified by face from firsthand observation; admission affirmed
Exclusion of officer's opinion about lineup quality	State: objected to lay opinion; officer not qualified as expert	Morgan: officer (observer) would have testified lineup was "garbage" and reported it	Court: officer lacked qualification/training to give such opinion; exclusion proper; no plain error
Prior-offender classification without pleading	State: classification allowed; sentencing by court rather than jury after admission/waiver	Morgan: indictment failed to allege prior-offender status, causing plain error and possible parole consequences	Court: State conceded pleading error but Morgan waived jury-sentencing right at trial; court found no demonstrable parole or other prejudice from classification; no plain error

State v. Kayser, 397 S.W.3d 37 (Mo. App. E.D. 2013) (standard of review for admission/exclusion of evidence and identifications)
State v. Thomas, 407 S.W.3d 190 (Mo. App. E.D. 2013) (reviewing suppression-hearing and trial record; facts construed favorably to trial court)
State v. Mullins, 340 S.W.3d 311 (Mo. App. E.D. 2011) (definition of unduly suggestive pretrial identification)
State v. Weaver, 912 S.W.2d 499 (Mo. banc 1995) (clothing differences alone do not render lineup impermissibly suggestive)
State v. Chambers, 234 S.W.3d 501 (Mo. App. E.D. 2007) (physical dissimilarity alone insufficient to show impermissible suggestion)
State v. Dizer, 119 S.W.3d 156 (Mo. App. E.D. 2003) (factors for reliability of identification: opportunity to view, certainty, temporal proximity, description accuracy)
State v. Williams, 427 S.W.3d 259 (Mo. App. E.D. 2014) (expert-opinion qualification requires knowledge from education or experience)
State v. Drudge, 296 S.W.3d 37 (Mo. App. E.D. 2009) (statutory right to jury sentencing can be waived by defendant)
State v. Jolley, 45 S.W.3d 549 (Mo. App. E.D. 2001) (discusses potential parole effects of offender classifications)