State v. Stover
388 S.W.3d 138
| Mo. | 2012Background
- Stover appealed his conviction for first-degree trafficking in PCP (90g+).
- Trial court denied motions to suppress evidence and statements pre-Miranda; verdict-directing instruction omission later alleged plain error.
- Stop on I-70 occurred for following too closely; officer began investigating due to suspicious travel indicators and inconsistencies.
- A large quantity of PCP (about 10 gallons) was found in the trunk alongside a watch Stover admitted owning.
- Stover and Butler shared control of the vehicle; incriminating statements and rental/flight records linked them to the contraband.
- Court reversed and remanded for plain-error review due to defective verdict director; other issues addressed for retrial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence of knowing possession | Stover | Stover | Evidence supported knowing possession |
| Reasonable suspicion for extended detention | Stover | Stover | Detention was supported by reasonable suspicion |
| Pre-Miranda statements admissibility | Stover | Stover | Statements pre-Miranda not excluded under Berkemer |
| Admissibility of refusal to consent to search | Stover | Stover | Admissible to explain subsequent actions, not to prove guilt |
| Plain error in verdict-directing instruction | Stover | Stover | Plain error due to omission; reversal and remand |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Purlee, 839 S.W.2d 584 (Mo. banc 1992) (knowledge may be inferred from acts in possession cases)
- State v. Woods, 284 S.W.3d 630 (Mo.App.2009) (joint control requires incriminating connections to prove knowledge)
- State v. Cooper, 215 S.W.3d 128 (Mo. banc 2007) (verdict-director must include all essential elements; plain error if not)
- State v. Doolittle, 896 S.W.2d 27 (Mo. banc 1995) (plain error when essential element omitted)
- State v. Sund, 215 S.W.3d 719 (Mo. banc 2007) (detention unlawful if post-violation search lacks suspicion)
- State v. Maginnis, 150 S.W.3d 117 (Mo.App.2004) (distinguishable from prolonged detention cases)
- United States v. Sharpe, 470 U.S. 675 (1985) (reasonableness of detention during investigatory stop)
- Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 (1976) (precludes use of silence to prove guilt; discussed in context of waiver not directly applied here)
- Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 421 (1984) (routine traffic stops not custody for Miranda purposes)