Legal Opinion · Dissent

Stiers v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided June 19, 2007No. WD 65559Published

1DissentHoward, P.J.

The majority is correct when it notes “[a] self-defense instruction must be submitted “when substantial evidence is adduced to support it, even when that evidence is inconsistent with the defendant’s testimony.’” State v. Avery, 120 S.W.3d 196, 200 (Mo. banc 2003) (citation omitted). However, a defense inconsistent with the defendant’s testimony is only available where the State or a third party offers evidence of the defendant’s prior inconsistent statements supporting self-defense. Id. at 200-01. See also State v. Houcks, 954 S.W.2d 636, 639 (Mo.App. W.D.1997). In the current case, neither…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. AverySupreme Court of Missouri · 2003
  2. State v. RandolphSupreme Court of Missouri · 1973
  3. State v. ThompsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 2004
  4. State v. BuhrMissouri Court of Appeals · 2005
  5. State v. HoucksMissouri Court of Appeals · 1997

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API