Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Battle

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided November 22, 1983No. 63436Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBlackmar, Judge

I concur in all parts of the principal opinion relating to the affirmance of the conviction. I believe, however, that the death sentence should be set aside. Section 565.-014.3(3), RSMo 1978, enjoins us to consider “the defendant” in determining whether the sentence of death is excessive or disproportionate. The present defendant was 18 years old at the time the offense was committed. The principal opinion observes that the legislature imposed no restriction on the age of a person who could be executed. This Court still has its reviewing responsibility and is obliged to substitute its…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Furman v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Godfrey v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  3. State v. BlairSupreme Court of Missouri · 1982
  4. State v. BaskervilleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1981
  5. State v. GreathouseSupreme Court of Missouri · 1982

3 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