State v. Taylor
2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 999
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Detective search of 5029 Aubert Ave based on informant tip identified Arnold Taylor and two others.
- Police executed a warrant; defendant fled basement when entry occurred and was detained.
- Basement contained drugs, drug paraphernalia, and defendant’s belongings; items linked to him.
- Defendant admitted staying in the house; later confessed he was a “small-time” dealer and that items were his.
- Defendant was charged as a prior and persistent offender; jury convicted on all counts; sentences imposed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for possession with intent to distribute | Taylor living in basement; items found linked to him | Insufficient evidence of purposeful/knowing possession | Sufficient evidence supports intent to distribute claim |
| Hearsay by confidential informant | Testimony explains investigatory steps, not truth of assertion | Violates confrontation rights | Admission not error; background testimony admissible to explain conduct |
| Motion to suppress based on probable cause | Warrant supported by confidential informant and surveillance | Affidavit insufficient for probable cause | Probable cause established; suppression denial affirmed |
| Jury instruction on lesser included offense | No basis to acquit greater offense and convict lesser | Evidence could support lesser after acquittal on greater | No reversible error; no required lesser-included instruction |
| Prior and persistent offender findings | Proper procedure followed for drug offender status | Clerical issues and unproven 558.016 status | Remand for nunc pro tunc correction; overall conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. French, 308 S.W.3d 266 (Mo.App. E.D.2010) (sufficiency standard for criminal conviction)
- State v. Silvey, 894 S.W.2d 662 (Mo. banc 1995) (jury credibility and weighing of evidence)
- State v. White, 247 S.W.3d 557 (Mo.App. E.D.2007) (credibility and weight of testimony to jury)
- State v. Sherrill, 657 S.W.2d 731 (Mo.App. S.D.1983) (evidence of possession and credibility of statements)
- State v. Madorie, 156 S.W.3d 351 (Mo. banc 2005) (abuse of discretion standard for evidentiary rulings)
- State v. Neher, 213 S.W.3d 44 (Mo. banc 2007) (probable cause in warrant affidavits, corroboration where informant reliable)
- State v. Dunn, 817 S.W.2d 241 (Mo. banc 1991) (hearsay and admissibility context)
- State v. Lockett, 165 S.W.3d 199 (Mo.App. E.D.2005) (hearsay exceptions not implicating confrontation rights)
- State v. Shigemura, 680 S.W.2d 256 (Mo.App. E.D.1984) (limits on informant-based testimony to prove elements)