State v. Presberry

I respectfully concur in the principal opinion as to Points I, II, IV, and V. However, I cannot join the rationale expressed by the principal opinion supporting reversal of Point III.

The principal opinion is positing that the State could not prove Defendant had the apparent possibility to commit the crime, see State v. Mulder, 916 S.W.2d 346 (Mo.App. E.D.1996), because the intended victim left, and there was no contact with the victim. This “no contact” analysis is extracted from State v. Ballenger, 72 S.W.3d 154 (Mo.App. W.D.2002). The Ballenger *99court analyzed a defendant’s relationship to…