State v. Miller
372 S.W.3d 455
| Mo. | 2012Background
- Miller was convicted of six sexual offenses against his minor daughter with concurrent sentences.
- Jury found Miller not guilty on counts I, II, VII, X and guilty on counts III, IV, V, VI, VIII, IX.
- Counts III and V alleged first-degree statutory sodomy and deviate sexual assault within a specified date range; the verdict-directing instructions mirrored those dates.
- The trial court instructed on count IV (first-degree child molestation) via an instruction later deemed plain error because the defined “sexual contact” differed from the statute in effect during the charged period.
- The court reversed Miller’s convictions on counts III, V, and IV (the latter for plain error) and remanded for acquittal or new trial as appropriate; other convictions were affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for counts III and V | Miller’s acts occurred earlier (1998–1999) not within charged dates | State proved acts within a broader period and time not essential for these offenses | Insufficient evidence; reverse and acquit on counts III and V |
| Sufficiency of evidence for count VI (sexual misconduct involving a child) | Evidence showed Miller knowingly exposed genitals as charged | Date range limitations invalid | Sufficient evidence; count VI affirmed |
| Sufficiency of evidence for count VIII (endangering welfare of a child) | Proved sexual acts implicating endangerment within the period | Elements not met beyond other charged acts | Sufficient evidence; count VIII affirmed |
| Plain error in Instruction No. 8 (count IV first-degree child molestation) | Instruction permitted conviction for acts not criminal during charged period | No plain error or constitutional violation | Plain error; count IV reversed and remanded for new trial |
| Post-arrest silence and other trial conduct | State improperly commented on silence and evidence admitted without proper basis | Any issues were harmless or not prejudicial | No manifest injustice; plain-error analysis not warranted for these items |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Letica, 356 S.W.3d 157 (Mo. banc 2011) (standard of review for sufficiency of evidence in criminal cases)
- State v. Nash, 339 S.W.3d 500 (Mo. banc 2011) (evidence viewed in light most favorable to the verdict)
- State v. Bowles, 360 S.W.2d 706 (Mo.1962) (time element in sexual abuse cases and alibi considerations)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1980) (standard for sufficiency of evidence; rational juror could convict beyond reasonable doubt)
- Burks v. United States, 437 U.S. 1 (1978) (double jeopardy concerns in reversal and retrial)