STATE OF MISSOURI v. RODNEY J. GREEN, 505 S.W.3d 837

Overnight, Rodney J. Green forced entry into multiple homes during a two-day crime spree, shot and wounded victims, stole vehicles and cards, and assaulted and sexually assaulted another victim the next day.
Green was apprehended after a high-speed chase and crash; evidence and his confession led to charges on multiple counts (robbery, assault, armed criminal action, burglary, attempted forcible rape, forcible sodomy, resisting arrest).
Jury convicted Green on 13 felonies; aggregate sentence: life plus 75 years (grouped concurrent and consecutive terms).
On appeal Green did not challenge sufficiency of evidence but raised four issues: (1) admissibility of pretrial identification, (2) motion to sever counts, (3) judge disqualification for prior representation, and (4) denial of self-representation.
Trial court admitted an out‑of‑court one‑photo identification (a show‑up) and in‑court ID by victim Mrs. Walsh; denied severance; judge presided despite prior limited representation of Green in private practice; court declined to remove counsel when Green inconsistently sought dismissal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of pretrial ID (show‑up)	Identification was impermissibly suggestive and unreliable	Mrs. Walsh positively identified Green; exigent circumstances justified one‑photo show‑up	Court: show‑up not unduly suggestive; admission proper (point denied)
Motion to sever counts	D’s offenses against Ms. D__ (day 2; sexual offenses) should be tried separately due to different nature and potential spillover prejudice	Crimes were part of a connected two‑day spree; statutory joinder proper; alleged prejudice was not particularized	Court: joinder proper; no abuse of discretion denying severance (point denied)
Judicial disqualification	Judge should have recused because he formerly represented Green in unrelated matter	Prior limited representation of a party in unrelated matter does not mandate disqualification; judge showed no extrajudicial bias	Court (plain‑error review): no manifest injustice; no disqualification required (point denied)
Right to self‑representation	Green contends he was denied the right to represent himself	Record shows inconsistent requests: sought to dismiss only one of two public defenders, later asked for reappointment; request not unequivocal	Court: request for self‑representation not unequivocal; no plain or obvious error in refusing to leave Green unrepresented (point denied)

State v. Eoff, 193 S.W.3d 366 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006) (show‑ups not unduly suggestive under exigent circumstances)
Foster v. State, 348 S.W.3d 158 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011) (standard for reviewing admission of identification testimony)
State v. Murray, 428 S.W.3d 705 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014) (upholding show‑up identifications in exigent situations)
State v. McElvain, 228 S.W.3d 592 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007) (rejecting one‑photo lineup challenge absent police misconduct)
State v. St. George, 497 S.W.3d 308 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016) (two‑step joinder/severance review framework)
State v. McDonald, 321 S.W.3d 313 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010) (joinder of closely connected multi‑day offenses appropriate)
Cain v. Hershewe, 760 S.W.2d 146 (Mo. Ct. App. 1988) (prior unrelated representation by judge does not mandate disqualification)
State v. Hampton, 959 S.W.2d 444 (Mo. banc 1997) (self‑representation requires an unequivocal invocation)
Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129 (2009) (discussing plain‑error/harmless‑error standards)
State v. Sanders, 482 S.W.3d 492 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016) (noting unresolved questions about unpreserved structural error on plain‑error review)