Criminal Law :  Voir Dire –  Kidnapping –  ‘Substantial Period’

Listen to this article

(1)Where the state asked during voir dire in a kidnapping case if prospective jurors would be able to convict without proof of motive, the question did not inappropriately seek a commitment from jurors, so the trial court did not abuse its discretion in overruling the defendant’s objection.

(2)Where a defendant held his son up as a shield for 90 seconds when officers were attempting to tase him, the state presented sufficient evidence to find that the defendant confined the child for a “substantial period,” and the prosecution of the defendant for kidnapping and other offenses arising from the same conduct was not prohibited.

Judgment is affirmed.

State v. Conaway (MLW No. 71776/Case No. WD80332 – 17 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District, Ahuja, J.) Appealed from circuit court, Jackson County, Fahnestock, J. (Keith P. O’Connor, Kansas City, Missouri, for appellant) (Garrick F.D. Aplin, Jefferson City, for respondent).

Read the full text of this opinion. (PDF)