Missouri Court of Appeals· 2/6/1989
State v. Seidel
Citations
- 764 S.W.2d 517
- 1989 Mo. App. LEXIS 145
- 1989 WL 8217
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- deferring to the juvenile court’s finding of maturity because it had the opportunity to observe the juvenile in person
- the limited time a juvenile would be in the Division of Youth Services, while not a section 211.071.6 factor, is relevant to the suitability of the juvenile justice framework
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Crow, Greene, Holstein
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
7 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. WoodworthMissouri Court of Appeals· 1997-02-25· cited 52×
- State v. SimpsonMissouri Court of Appeals· 1992-07-14· cited 18×
- State v. SelvyMissouri Court of Appeals· 1996-04-19· cited 11×
- State ex rel. K_ D. C v. CopelandMissouri Court of Appeals· 1993-05-04
- In the Interest of: T.D.S., Jr.Missouri Court of Appeals· 2021-10-26
- In the Interest of: K.M.F.Missouri Court of Appeals· 2023-05-23
- In the Interest of: K.X.B. v. Juvenile OfficerMissouri Court of Appeals· 2024-08-27
Cites
5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- In Interest of ADRSupreme Court of Missouri· 1980-08-18· cited 37×
- State v. TateMissouri Court of Appeals· 1982-05-04· cited 20×
- State v. MouserMissouri Court of Appeals· 1986-07-15· cited 18×
- State v. KemperMissouri Court of Appeals· 1975-12-31· cited 15×
- State v. GarbeMissouri Court of Appeals· 1987-09-22· cited 6×
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.