ruling that the jury could reasonably infer, from the collective impact of the circumstantial evidence, that the defendant was guilty of second degree murder
How later courts described this case
- ruling that the jury could reasonably infer, from the collective impact of the circumstantial evidence, that the defendant was guilty of second degree murder
- jury may reasonably infer from the concealment of a victim’s body that the victim was killed intentionally under circumstances that were not justifiable or excusable
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
BARDGETT, Judge
(dissenting).
I respectfully dissent. As demonstrated by the principal opinion, this is purely a circumstantial evidence case and is, in my opinion, controlled by State v. Johnson, 505 S.W.2d 94 (Mo.1974), which was followed in State v. Stapleton, 518 S.W.2d 292 (Mo. banc 1975). See also my concurring opinion in State v. Mudgett, 531 S.W.2d 275, 283 (Mo. banc 1975). According to those cases, the court in the instant case was required to instruct on manslaughter and the failure to do so is reversible error.