Legal Opinion
State v. Honeycutt
Supreme Court of Missouri
Decided November 26, 2013No. SC 92229PublishedCited by 86 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ZEL M. FISCHER, Judge.
This Court holds article I, section 13’s ban on the passage of any law retrospective in its operation does not apply to criminal laws. Section 571.070.1(1)1 is a criminal law, and as such, the circuit court erred in dismissing the charge against Ho-neycutt on the ground that the statute was unconstitutionally retrospective as applied to him. The circuit court’s judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded.
Factual and Procedural Background
The facts are undisputed. The State charged Honeycutt as a prior and persistent offender with two counts of stealing a firearm in…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- Calder v. BullSupreme Court of the United States · 1798
- Smith v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Ogden v. SaundersSupreme Court of the United States · 1827
- Lincoln Credit Co. v. PeachSupreme Court of Missouri · 1982
- Clark v. Kansas City, St. Louis & Chicago RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1909
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by86 opinions
- Care & Treatment of Kirk v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 2017
- Watson v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 2017
- Jason D. Dodson and Jason D. Dodson, Jr., a Minor, and Eva Raine Dodson-Lohse, a Minor, and August William Davis Dodson, a Minor, said Minors appearing by the duly appointed Next Friend Jason D. Dodson, Respondent/Cross-Appellant v. Robert P. Ferrara, M.D., and Mercy Clinic Heart and Vascular, LLC, Appellants/Cross-Respondents.Supreme Court of Missouri · 2016
- Melody FRYE, Respondent, v. Ronald J. LEVY, Director, State of Missouri, Department of Social Services, Children’s Division, AppellantSupreme Court of Missouri · 2014
- Darrell Cope and the Missouri Democratic Party v. Michael L. Parson and Mike KehoeSupreme Court of Missouri · 2019
81 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.