Skip to main content

State v. Banks

Citations

  • 135 S.W.3d 497
  • 2004 Mo. App. LEXIS 529
  • 2004 WL 768954

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • discussing a very similar situation at length, and concluding that providing snapshots of the defendant's penis did not constitute an adequate offer of proof to explain why the court should have allowed him to display his penis to the jury
  • discussing a very similar situation at length, and concluding that providing snapshots of the defendant's penis did not constitute an adequate offer of proof to explain why the court should have allowed him to display his penis to the jury
  • trial court abuses its discretion in rejecting a plea only if the decision “is so arbitrary and unreasonable that it shocks the sense of justice and indicates a lack of careful con- sideration” (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Smith, Holliger, Hardwick

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.