History
  • No items yet
midpage
State of Missouri v. Nanette Sue Litherland
477 S.W.3d 156
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2015
Read the full case

Background

  • Nanette S. Litherland appeals after a jury convicted her of first-degree assault and first-degree murder, with reversible error asserted on denied continuance.
  • The offenses related to shootings at the Litherland family farm: James Litherland shot on Sept 22, 2009; Jerry Litherland killed on Nov 8, 2009.
  • Defendant’s sole defense witness, M.L., was pregnant and went into labor the morning of trial, creating temporary unavailability.
  • Defense sought a one-week continuance; the State opposed; the court denied the motion and proceeded to trial without live testimony from M.L.
  • Rule 25.13 would allow deposition testimony if witness is unavailable, but the court’s denial raised issues about using a deposition given M.L.’s anticipated live testimony.
  • The appellate court held the denial of the continuance was an abuse of discretion, prejudicial to Litherland, and remanded for a new trial.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether denial of a continuance for a temporarily unavailable sole defense witness was reversible error Litherland contends denial abused discretion and prejudiced defense State argues no abuse; trial proceeding despite unavailability was permissible Abuse of discretion; prejudicial; remand for new trial

Key Cases Cited

  • State v. Salter, 250 S.W.3d 705 (Mo. banc 2008) (continuance standards and prejudice considerations)
  • State v. Blocker, 133 S.W.3d 502 (Mo. banc 2004) (witness unavailability and right to defense)
  • State v. Morin, 873 S.W.2d 858 (Mo. App. S.D. 1994) (prejudice where defense witness unavailable)
  • State v. Simonton, 49 S.W.3d 766 (Mo. App. W.D. 2001) (due process and right to present witnesses in defense)
  • State v. Blocker, 133 S.W.3d 502 (Mo. banc 2004) (reiterated analysis of continuance due to key witness)
  • McBurney v. Cameron, 248 S.W.3d 36 (Mo. App. W.D. 2008) (deposition vs. live testimony credibility considerations)
  • State v. Wilson, 732 S.W.2d 186 (Mo. App. W.D. 1987) (prejudice from absence of vital witness)
  • State v. Salter, 250 S.W.3d 705 (Mo. banc 2008) (discretionary standard for continuances)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: State of Missouri v. Nanette Sue Litherland
Court Name: Missouri Court of Appeals
Date Published: Sep 29, 2015
Citation: 477 S.W.3d 156
Docket Number: ED101551
Court Abbreviation: Mo. Ct. App.