vacated ___ U.S. ___, 100 S.Ct. 2935, 64 L.Ed.2d 820 (1980)
How later courts described this case
- vacated ___ U.S. ___, 100 S.Ct. 2935, 64 L.Ed.2d 820 (1980)
- Notes on Use, p. 304-85, para. 3
- decision vacated by order of the United States Supreme Court on May 27, 1980 and reconsideration ordered
Written by the judges who cited it.
Later courts went against this
Overruled by Missouri v. Hunter, 459 U.S. 359 (1983)
However the holding in Sours was overruled in Missouri v. Hunter,-U.S.-, 103 S.Ct. 673, 74 L.Ed.2d 535 (1983).
The opinion
DONNELLY, Judge,
dissenting.
The principal opinion treats the Per Curiam in Harris v. Oklahoma, 433 U.S. 682 , 97 S.Ct. 2912 , 53 L.Ed.2d 1054 (1977) as decisive here.
In my view, we are not bound by general declarations of law made by the United States Supreme Court. See State v. Clark, 592 S.W.2d 709, 719 (Mo. banc 1979) (Donnelly, J., dissenting).
*224 Of course, in a given factual setting, when the United States Supreme Court takes jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties, its- adjudication is the law of the case and its judgment is binding on this Court. But this is not the situation here.
I respectfully dissent.