Missouri Court of Appeals· 3/2/2010

State v. Harris

Citations

305 S.W.3d 482
2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 242
2010 WL 711210

How courts have described this case

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

noting expert testimony admissible on subjects about which the jurors lack experience or knowledge
stating expert testimony regarding amount of force required to inflict injuries such as those sustained by victim admissible as outside common experience of jurors and did not comment on defendant’s responsibility for those injuries
finding an unequivocal request for counsel where the defendant twice stated that she would “rather appoint a lawyer” and responded “yeah” when asked “are you trying to get [a lawyer] appointed for you?”
“To invoke a right to counsel pursuant to the Fifth Amendment, one must make an unambiguous, unequivocal and specific request for counsel.”
\[T]he State has the burden of production and persuasion to show by a preponderance of the evidence that a defendant's motion to suppress should be overruled.\
invocation of right to counsel requires “an unambiguous, unequivocal and specific request for counsel”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Sullivan, Dowd, Cohen

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

21 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.