State v. Adams
350 S.W.3d 864
Mo. Ct. App.2011Background
- May 15, 2009, Adams shot a firearm three times from his car, injuring a man on the sidewalk.
- Defendant claimed self-defense, testifying a threatening crowd prevented backing up.
- He testified two shots went through the passenger window and one through the sunroof; he fled, threw the gun into a river, and stayed in a hotel for two days.
- He was charged with assault in the second degree, armed criminal action, and unlawful use of a weapon; found guilty on all counts; sentences to be served concurrently.
- The trial court found Adams to be a prior and persistent offender and imposed 3 years, 7 years, and 15 years, respectively, for the offenses.
- On appeal, Adams challenges prior bad act evidence, voir dire conduct, and the persistent-offender finding; the court erred in the persistent-offender finding and corrects the judgment by deleting that finding; overall conviction affirmed as modified.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prior bad act evidence summary | State argues admissibility to impeach credibility; not outcome-determinative | Adams argues improper admission of rape evidence as prior bad act | Harmless error; no outcome-determinative prejudice; affirmed as to this issue. |
| Voir dire disclosure of non-critical facts | State contends questions were within discretion and non-consequential | Adams claims improper disclosure of non-critical facts to venire | Not preserved for review; plain error relief denied; point denied. |
| Persistent offender finding | State contends two or more felonies required; finding supported | Adams contends only one prior felony; not a persistent offender | Judgment corrected to delete persistent-offender finding; no prejudice given within-range sentence. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Isa, 850 S.W.2d 876 (Mo. banc 1993) (reversal for admission of error requires prejudice showing)
- State v. Johnson, 207 S.W.3d 24 (Mo. banc 2006) (-outcome-determinative prejudice framework)
- State v. Sapien, 337 S.W.3d 72 (Mo.App.2011) (prejudice analysis for uncharged acts; credibility context)
- Black v. State, 50 S.W.3d 778 (Mo. banc 2001) (harmless-error standard for improperly admitted evidence)
- State v. Holleran, 197 S.W.3d 603 (Mo.App.2006) (consciousness of guilt as circumstantial support)
- State v. Long, 951 S.W.2d 679 (Mo.App.1997) (consciousness of guilt considerations)
- State v. Smith, 11 S.W.3d 733 (Mo.App.1999) (circumstantial evidence of guilt)
- State v. Robinson, 298 S.W.3d 119 (Mo.App.2009) (correction of judgment where persistent-offender finding improper)
- State v. Broom, 281 S.W.3d 353 (Mo.App.2009) (judicial correction of judgment without prejudice)