Supreme Court of Missouri· 9/11/1984
State v. Byrd
Citations
- 676 S.W.2d 494
- 1984 Mo. LEXIS 302
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- privilege protecting marital communications “is intended to encourage full disclosure and trust between the parties to a marriage”
- no privilege where one party to the purported marriage is married to a third party
- no privilege where one party to the purported marriage is married to a third party
- Privilege “depends upon the maker’s intention that the communication be confidential * * *.”
- Privilege \depends upon the maker's intention that the communication be confidential * * *.\
- defendant planned a robbery involving multiple murders and carried it out
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Gunn
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
56 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- State v. McMillinSupreme Court of Missouri· 1990-02-13· cited 215×
- State v. ShurnSupreme Court of Missouri· 1993-12-21· cited 205×
- State v. GraySupreme Court of Missouri· 1994-11-22· cited 170×
- Maurice Oscar Byrd v. William Armontrout, Warden of Missouri State PenitentiaryEighth Circuit· 1989-09-06· cited 159×
- State v. ClemonsSupreme Court of Missouri· 1997-05-27· cited 125×
- State v. KilgoreSupreme Court of Missouri· 1989-06-13· cited 113×
- State v. DavisSupreme Court of Missouri· 1991-07-23· cited 107×
- State v. DriscollSupreme Court of Missouri· 1986-06-17· cited 103×
- Dufour v. MississippiSupreme Court· 1985-02-19· cited 93×
- State v. RoddenSupreme Court of Missouri· 1987-04-14· cited 92×
- State v. MaloneSupreme Court of Missouri· 1985-08-07· cited 85×
- State v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Missouri· 1997-02-25· cited 77×
- State v. LeeSupreme Court of Missouri· 1992-12-18· cited 64×
- State v. HutchisonSupreme Court of Missouri· 1997-11-25· cited 58×
- Rowe v. Farmers Ins. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri· 1985-10-16· cited 56×
- State v. PetarySupreme Court of Missouri· 1989-12-12· cited 51×
- State v. ReeseSupreme Court of Missouri· 1990-07-31· cited 49×
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Missouri· 1998-04-30· cited 48×
- State v. KelleyMissouri Court of Appeals· 1997-07-17· cited 47×
- State v. SloanSupreme Court of Missouri· 1988-07-26· cited 46×
Cites
40 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Furman v. GeorgiaSupreme Court· 1972-06-29· cited 5,066×
- Witherspoon v. IllinoisSupreme Court· 1968-06-03· cited 4,818×
- Enmund v. FloridaSupreme Court· 1982-07-02· cited 2,349×
- Pulley v. HarrisSupreme Court· 1984-01-23· cited 2,080×
- John A. Spinkellink, 1 v. Louie L. Wainwright, Secretary, Florida Department of Offender RehabilitationFifth Circuit· 1978-08-21· cited 403×
- State v. McDonaldSupreme Court of Missouri· 1983-11-22· cited 175×
- State v. GuinanSupreme Court of Missouri· 1984-02-15· cited 157×
- State v. PrestonSupreme Court of Missouri· 1984-05-15· cited 125×
- State v. HoltSupreme Court of Missouri· 1980-01-15· cited 120×
- State v. GilmoreSupreme Court of Missouri· 1983-11-22· cited 74×
- State v. GreerMissouri Court of Appeals· 1980-11-03· cited 72×
- State v. NolanSupreme Court of Missouri· 1968-02-12· cited 67×
- State v. LashleySupreme Court of Missouri· 1984-03-20· cited 63×
- State v. LawsSupreme Court of Missouri· 1983-11-22· cited 60×
- State v. ArmbrusterSupreme Court of Missouri· 1982-10-12· cited 55×
- State v. EuellSupreme Court of Missouri· 1979-06-29· cited 45×
- State v. SuttonSupreme Court of Missouri· 1970-03-09· cited 40×
- State v. ZagorskiSupreme Court of Missouri· 1982-05-11· cited 38×
- State v. DrumminsSupreme Court of Missouri· 1918-06-03· cited 36×
- Maier v. BrockSupreme Court of Missouri· 1909-07-01· cited 34×
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.