Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Vainikos

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided April 8, 1963No. 49315Published

1DissentDalton, Judge

I find it necessary to dissent because I believe that the court in reversing the judgment in this case and remanding the case for a new trial has given the defendant-appellant much more consideration than he is entitled to receive under the facts shown by the record and the law as previously declared by this court. The conviction is reversed on the sole basis of the police officer’s answer to the last question asked at the close of all of the evidence, as follows:

“MR. KOSTER: Did he give you an answer, Officer?
“A. He refused to make a statement.”

It will be noted that the defendant interposed…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. State v. FosterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1946
  2. State v. KingSupreme Court of Missouri · 1938
  3. State v. ScownSupreme Court of Missouri · 1958
  4. State v. HadleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1952
  5. State v. SwisherSupreme Court of Missouri · 1953

17 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