Skip to main content

State v. Love

Citations

  • 293 S.W.3d 471
  • 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1232
  • 2009 WL 2735787

How courts have described this case

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

  • concluding defendant had not shown substantial prejudice when the evidence was simple and the jury was instructed that \[e]ach count must be considered separately.\
  • taking into account the close proximity of the area of the crimes-near the Delmar Metrolink station-and that the victims were attacked while walking to or from there in determining joinder was proper
  • finding joinder proper where both crimes involved a robbery within a few weeks of each other, both involved individual male victims, in each robbery the victim was threatened with a gun, and in each robbery the perpetrators stole money and the victim's coat
  • “The mere fact that juries are apt to regard with a more jaundiced eye a person charged with two crimes than a person charged with one does not call for severance.” (internal quotation omitted)
  • listing nonexclusive factors that demonstrate similar tactics

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Kurt S. Odenwald

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

9 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.