394 S.W.3d 454
Mo. Ct. App.2013Background
- Defendant Cory Brooks pled guilty to second-degree murder, armed criminal action, and conspiracy; State recommended concurrent sentences of 30, 30, and 7 years.
- At sentencing, Sergeant Tillott testified about jail incident reports, which were offered through him after a hearsay and business records objection.
- Defense objected that reports were double hearsay and that the custodian requirements for the business records exception were not met because the reports were written by other officers.
- The trial court overruled objections, admitted the reports via Tillott, and he read entries into the record.
- Defendant was sentenced to concurrent terms of 30, 15, and 7 years; he appeals challenging the evidentiary ruling at sentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether sentencing evidentiary ruling was proper | Claim cognizable on direct appeal; business records satisfied; hearsay allowed in sentencing. | Claim not cognizable on direct appeal; improper hearsay and custodian requirements not met; double hearsay invalid. | Not cognizable on direct appeal; no reversible error found; business records properly applied; hearsay permitted at sentencing. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Goodues, 277 S.W.3d 324 (Mo.App.2009) (direct-appeal scope for guilty-plea challenges)
- State v. Sharp, 39 S.W.3d 70 (Mo.App.2001) (direct-appeal review limits in guilty-plea cases)
- State v. Carter, 62 S.W.3d 569 (Mo.App.2001) (direct-appeal limitations after guilty plea)
- State v. Sparks, 916 S.W.2d 234 (Mo.App.1995) (direct-appeal scope post-guilty plea)
- State v. Craig, 287 S.W.3d 676 (Mo.2009) (bifurcated proceedings on enhancement issues; direct-appeal cognizability depends on context)
- Martin v. State, 291 S.W.3d 846 (Mo.App.2009) (review of hearsay issue in sentencing via post-conviction relief)
- State v. Berry, 168 S.W.3d 527 (Mo.App.2005) (hearsay at sentencing; permissible in PSI contexts)
- State v. Kreutzer, 928 S.W.2d 854 (Mo.banc 1996) (business-records custodian testimony requirement)
- State v. Mullins, 140 S.W.3d 64 (Mo.App.2004) (judge may disregard improper material in bench trial)