State ex rel. Hudson v. Webber
Missouri Court of Appeals
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWasserstrom, Chief Judge
I agree with the majority opinion in all respects except as to the last question (listed as No. 9 in the majority opinion), which was put to the witness. With respect to that one question, in my view, the witness has not shown an adequate basis for a privilege against testifying.
The Missouri cases have utilized two different tests in determining whether a witness is entitled to the privilege against self-incrimination. Some of the cases declare that if a question submitted to a witness is innocuous on its face, then the witness must assume the burden of proving why that question would tend to…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State v. BrooksMissouri Court of Appeals · 1977
- State Ex Rel. Lee v. CavanaughMissouri Court of Appeals · 1967
- Cantor v. SaitzMissouri Court of Appeals · 1978
- State Ex Rel. Caloia v. WeinsteinMissouri Court of Appeals · 1975
- Presta v. OwsleyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1961
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.