State v. Pierce
Supreme Court of Missouri
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
OPINION CONCURRING IN PART AND DISSENTING IN PART
Patricia Breckenridge, judge
I concur in the principal opinion's holding that the circuit court did not err in overruling Bryan Pierce's motion to suppress evidence. I respectfully dissent, however, from the principal opinion's holding that the circuit did not err in sentencing Mr. Pierce based on a mistaken belief as to the applicable enhanced range of punishment.
The principal opinion acknowledges the circuit court misstated the range of punishment on the record at the sentencing *907hearing when it stated expressly, on the record, that the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- United States v. TuckerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- State v. HartSupreme Court of Missouri · 2013
- State of Missouri v. Sylvester R. Sisco IISupreme Court of Missouri · 2015
- Wraggs v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1977
- State v. TaylorMissouri Court of Appeals · 2002
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.