Skip to main content

State v. Daws

Citations

  • 311 S.W.3d 806
  • 2010 Mo. LEXIS 134
  • 2010 WL 2099299

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that lack of voir dire transcript did not prejudice defendant; requiring due diligence to rectify transcript errors is not prejudicial
  • “The focus is on the elements of the offenses at issue, not the underlying conduct that resulted in the defendant being charged.”
  • “The [D]ouble [J]eopardy [C]lause ‘contains two distinct protections for criminal defendants: (a
  • five elements of resisting arrest are: (1) law enforcement officer is making or attempting to make lawful arrest or stop; (2) defendant knew of or reasonably should have known of law enforcement officer’s lawful attempt; (3) defendant resists by fleeing; (4

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Richard B. Teitelman

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

26 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

6 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.