Free Newsletter
Criminal Law-Assault-Persistent Offender
Staff Report//July 1, 2026//
Defendant appealed the trial court’s judgment following his conviction for assault, which found that defendant was a persistent offender. Defendant argued that the trial court erred in making that determination instead of the jury.
Where defendant failed to show that the jury would have made a different determination as the evidence was sufficient to find beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant had committed previous felonies in Missouri and Illinois, there was no prejudicial error in designating defendant a persistent offender.
Judgment is affirmed.
State v. Otis (MLW No. 85025/Case No. SC101190 – 11 pages) (Supreme Court of Missouri, Broniec, J.) Appealed from circuit court, St. Charles County, Horack, J. (Chad Flanders, St. Louis for appellant) (Garrick Aplin, Jefferson City for respondent)
Legal Tech
- How ransomware tactics against law firms are changing
- How large language models are leveling the personal injury playing field
- Attorney Share, Lawmatics integrate to automate law firm referrals
Latest Opinion Digests
- Criminal Law-Second-Degree Rape-Sufficiency of Evidence
- Criminal Law-Witness Tampering-Sufficiency of Evidence
- Criminal Law-Post-Conviction Relief-Abandonment by Counsel
- Criminal Law-Filing Criminal Charges-Attorney General Aid
- Criminal Law-Civil Commitment-Sexually Violent Predator
- Criminal Law-Assault-Prosecutorial Misconduct
- Real Property-Prescriptive Easement-Public Right of Way
Top stories
- Missouri Bar committee seeks input on rural legal service gaps
- Appeals court orders new look at conversion therapy case following Supreme Court ruling
- Jury finds seat belt maker liable in $40.5M child injury case
- Injured motorist recovers policy limits, plus medical damages in under a year
- Mother obtains six-figure settlement after rear-end crash leads to lifelong pain
- 8th Circuit affirms denial of preliminary injunction against SB 751
- New dedicated coverage of tech challenges facing law firms and legal departments
- Parity Act claim against insurer for child’s treatment survives motion to dismiss
