State v. Jordan, 404 S.W.3d 292

Defendant Alex Jordan was convicted after a jury trial of attempted robbery in the first degree (accomplice), felony murder in the second degree, robbery in the first degree (accomplice), assault in the first degree (accomplice), and four counts of ACA.
Co-defendant Darel Lotts previously accompanied Williams and Starks in drug transactions; Defendant did not personally buy drugs or speak with Williams in those deals.
On July 23, 2008, Williams and Starks met with Lotts and Defendant; Williams and Starks were in the front seat while Lotts and Defendant sat in the backseat; Defendant carried a gun in a book bag.
Lotts pulled the gun and forced Williams and Starks to yield drugs; Lotts and Defendant urged the victims to keep their hands up as they demanded the drugs.
Lotts fired, killing Starks and injuring Williams; both Lotts and Defendant fled; Williams received hospital treatment for about six weeks.
Defendant moved to sever his trial from Lotts and was tried separately; the jury convicted Defendant on multiple counts including ACA tied to the felony murder.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
collateral estoppel applicability	Jordan argues Lotts’s trial bars these convictions.	Lotts’s case cannot estop Jordan because he was not a party.	Collateral estoppel not applied; no plain error shown.
sufficiency to prove attempted robbery and ACA	Evidence shows Defendant aided Lotts in attempting to rob Starks.	No evidence that Defendant aided in an attempt to rob Starks.	Sufficient evidence that Defendant affirmatively participated; conviction upheld.
sufficiency for felony murder	Underlying felony and causal link to death proved; intent to murder not required.	Insufficient evidence of underlying attempted robbery and intent to commit felony murder.	Sufficient evidence for felony murder; affirmed.
sufficiency for robbery	Drugs had possessory interest; Defendant helped commit robbery by participating.	Illegal drugs cannot be the subject of robbery; no taking from Williams.	Robbery proven; accomplice liability valid; affirmed.
assault and ACA sufficiency	Defendant’s actions foreseeably caused or aided serious injury to Williams.	No requisite intent or injury shown.	Evidence supports accomplice assault; affirmed.
verdict form/plain error	Count II ACA verdict form was ambiguous.	Jury instruction misreference could misdirect.	No plain error; verdict form read coherently with instructions; affirmed.

State v. Barnum, 14 S.W.3d 587 (Mo. banc 2000) (accomplice liability encompasses affirmative participation)
State v. Withrow, 8 S.W.3d 75 (Mo. banc 1999) (attempt to prove intent and substantial step)
State v. Newton, 925 S.W.2d 468 (Mo. App. E.D. 1996) (collateral estoppel applies to same defendant in criminal cases)
Oates v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., 583 S.W.2d 713 (Mo. banc 1979) (criminal estoppel and related doctrines)
State v. Snyder, 288 S.W.3d 301 (Mo. App. E.D. 2009) (plain-error review standards in criminal appeals)
James v. Paul, 49 S.W.3d 678 (Mo. banc 2001) (same-party requirement for collateral estoppel in criminal cases)
Boone v. State, 147 S.W.3d 801 (Mo. App. E.D. 2004) (instructional error considerations and jury intelligence)