Missouri Supreme Court Archives

Supreme Court hears complex rural Missouri CAFO and Clean Water Commission case

September 27, 2019 By Brian Hauswirth

The state Supreme Court has heard oral arguments this week in Jefferson City involving a proposed concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO) in northwest Missouri’s Grundy County.

The case before the Supreme Court involves whether or not a 2016 state law is constitutional.

Trenton Farms LLC wants to build a swine operation, which is opposed by a group called “Hickory Neighbors United.” Hickory attorney Stephen Jeffery tells the court that a 2016 state law changing the composition of the Missouri Clean Water Commission is unconstitutional because it violates the single subject clause.

“Senate amendment number one is put onto House bill 1713 which amends (RSMO) 644.021 which alters the composition of the Clean Water Commission,” Jeffery tells the judges.

RSMO stands for revised statutes of Missouri.

Jeffery alleges that public representation on the Clean Water Commission “has been severely curtailed” due to the Legislature’s action. He says that because of the law, there is no longer a requirement that at least four members of the Clean Water Commission represent the public.

Much of Jeffery’s legal argument is based on the single subject clause. He says the law was amended, with about one week to go in the 2016 session.

“The membership of the Clean Water Commission has nothing to do with regulating water systems and all the other statutory provisions that were contained in House bill 1713,” says Jeffery.

The law was vetoed by then-Governor Jay Nixon (D) in 2016, but the GOP-controlled Legislature overrode that veto in September 2016, along with 12 other vetoes.

Grundy County residents on both sides of the controversial issue made the three-hour drive from Trenton to Jefferson City on Wednesday to hear oral arguments at the Missouri Supreme Court. CAFO supporters say it’s about economic development and jobs, while opponents worry about water and air quality.

Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued the case on behalf of Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt. Sauer is urging the Supreme Court to uphold the 2016 law, saying it’s constitutional. Solicitor General Sauer disagrees with CAFO critics who say the law violates the single subject clause.

“Regulation of water systems is clearly well within the scope of the broad umbrella categories for single subjects that this court has upheld in numerous cases,” Sauer tells the court.

He also says Hickory Neighbors lacks the legal standing to challenge the Clean Water Commission’s composition. Sauer also tells the court that Hickory Neighbors did not raise constitutional challenges on time.

The Supreme Court heard 34 minutes of oral arguments on Wednesday morning. They have not announced when they’ll issue a ruling in the case.

Click here to read the legal briefs from “Hickory Neighbors United” attorney Stephen Jeffery.

Click here to read the legal briefs from Solicitor General D. John Sauer.

A snapshot of the Missouri Legislature’s special session this week

September 9, 2019 By Brian Hauswirth

Missouri lawmakers will return to the State Capitol in Jefferson City on Monday for a special session involving a complicated State Supreme Court ruling about vehicle sales.

Missouri Governor Mike Parson signs legislation on July 10, 2019 (file photo courtesy of Governor Parson’s office)

While it’s not officially on the special session agenda, Democrats in both the House and Senate will have an opportunity to speak on the respective floors about the issue of gun violence, which is a top priority for the Legislative Black Caucus.

Governor Mike Parson (R) announced in August that he’s calling the special session over the Supreme Court’s “Kehlenbrink vs. Department of Revenue” case.

“After reviewing the court’s decision, we’ve decided to call a special session because it’s simply the right thing to do for the people of our state,” Parson announced in August. “The enforcement of this decision would create a financial burden on Missouri taxpayers and unnecessary government red tape that we can proactively prevent.”

The Supreme Court’s summer ruling involves using the sale proceeds of a vehicle as a credit against the purchase price of a new vehicle when calculating sales tax. Essentially, the Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that state law unambiguously permits the sale proceeds of only one vehicle as a credit against the purchase price of a new car, for the purposes of calculating sales tax.

“And really, the simple version of it (the Supreme Court’s ruling) is when you trade cars in, for example if you trade two cars in, you get a credit back on those two cars or for that model if you’re buying another one. There was a ruling by the Supreme Court that says you can only do one,” Parson told Missourinet on August 15 at the State Fair in Sedalia. That was the first time the governor had spoken publicly about the issue.

Parson says the ruling impacts about 2,000 to 3,000 Missourians, adding this is money out of their pocket.

GOP leaders in both chambers indicate the special session should end by Friday.

House Majority Leader Rob Vescovo, R-Arnold, has released a schedule indicating the House will have a technical session on Monday, with floor debate and discussion expected Wednesday morning and afternoon. The House is expected to give final approval to the vehicle tax bill on Wednesday.

Senate President Pro Tem Dave Schatz, R-Sullivan, tells Missourinet he expects the Senate to take possession of the bill on Thursday. A Senate hearing would take place Thursday, and Schatz expects the Senate to approve the bill on Friday.

Under the state Constitution, both chambers will also hold the annual veto session Wednesday at noon, which means they will stop the special session and then reconvene it after veto session ends.

Governor Parson vetoed six bills this year. State Sen. Denny Hoskins, R-Warrensburg, tells Missourinet he doesn’t expect any override attempts in the House or the Senate.

As for the Legislative Black Caucus, they support legislation allowing cities with high gun violence, like St. Louis and Kansas City, to approve their own gun control legislation. They wanted Governor Parson to include the issue in this week’s special session.

The governor opposes that, saying there are “many different opinions on how to find a solution.” Governor Parson met with State Rep. Ashley Bland Manlove, D-Kansas City, and other Black Caucus leaders behind closed doors last week at the Capitol. Representative Manlove says the governor is pushing for improved job opportunities in St. Louis and Kansas City.

The governor told Missourinet’s Jill Enders in St. Charles last week that he plans to send Missouri state troopers to St. Louis within the next 30 days. Parson also supports working with churches, to help prevent violence.

Manlove and other Black Caucus members will have an opportunity to discuss the issue on the floors of the House and Senate. Manlove tells Missourinet children are still dying, noting there have been more than 100 Kansas City homicides in 2019.

She says gun violence is “ravaging our streets,” and notes Kansas City and St. Louis have consistently ranked in the top ten deadliest cities for at least a decade.

Missouri governor calls special session on car sales; Quade blasts decision

August 21, 2019 By Brian Hauswirth

Missouri lawmakers will return to Jefferson City in September for a special session involving a complicated Missouri Supreme Court ruling about vehicle sales.

Missouri Governor Mike Parson briefs reporters at the State Fair in Sedalia on August 15, 2019 (Brian Hauswirth photo)

Governor Mike Parson (R) announced the special session today. Parson told Missourinet on Thursday at the State Fair that he was considering the special session over the Supreme Court’s “Kehlenbrink vs. Department of Revenue” case.

“After reviewing the court’s decision, we’ve decided to call a special session because it’s simply the right thing to do for the people of our state,” Parson announced today. “The enforcement of this decision would create a financial burden on Missouri taxpayers and unnecessary government red tape that we can proactively prevent.”

The Supreme Court case involves using the sale proceeds of a vehicle as a credit against the purchase price of a new vehicle when calculating sales tax. Essentially, the Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that state law unambiguously permits the sale proceeds of only one vehicle as a credit against the purchase price of a new car, for the purposes of calculating sales tax.

Parson said at the fair that the issue “needs to be fixed.” The governor says the ruling impacts about 2,000 to 3,000 Missourians, adding this is money out of their pocket.

House Minority Leader Crystal Quade, D-Springfield, has issued a statement, saying Governor Parson is “putting taxpayers on the hook for unnecessary special session.”

“Roughly 100,000 Missouri children have lost their state health care coverage, but the Parson administration says there’s no problem. Missouri’s irresponsible and weak gun laws have contributed to a sharp spike in gun violence and recently enabled a heavily-armed man to cause a panic at a Springfield Wal-Mart, yet Governor Parson does nothing. There are several issues that demand immediate legislative attention and would justify the cost of a special session. Creating an unnecessary tax break for a handful of people isn’t one of them,” Quade’s statement says.

Governor Parson told Missourinet on Thursday that the special session would be technical, adding that “it would be a very limited special session.” The governor’s comments at the fair indicated that issues like Medicaid and guns were off-the-table for a special session.

Under the governor’s call, lawmakers will return to Jefferson City on September 9. The special session will run concurrently with the veto session, which begins on September 11.

Missouri lawmakers could return to Jefferson City for special session, on vehicle sales

August 19, 2019 By Brian Hauswirth

Missouri’s governor is considering calling a special legislative session this fall in Jefferson City, involving a June Missouri Supreme Court ruling about car sales.

Missouri Governor Mike Parson briefs reporters at the State Fair in Sedalia on August 15, 2019 (Brian Hauswirth photo)

Governor Mike Parson (R) made the announcement at the State Fair in Sedalia on Thursday, in response to questions from Missourinet.

“The special session, we are looking at a couple of issues that we maybe need to be fixed,” Parson says. “We’re going to take a look at that, we’re in that process right now.”

The Supreme Court case is called “Kehlenbrink vs. Department of Revenue”, and involves using the sale proceeds of a vehicle as a credit against the purchase price of a new vehicle when calculating sales tax.

Essentially, the Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that state law unambiguously permits the sale proceeds of only one vehicle as a credit against the purchase price of a new car, for the purposes of calculating sales tax.

The governor says the ruling impacts about 2,000 to 3,000 Missourians, adding this is money out of their pocket. He emphasizes the special session would be technical, adding that “it would be a very limited special session.”

Governor Parson did not indicate when the possible special session would take place. One possibility would be to coincide with the annual veto session, which will take place on September 11 at the Statehouse.

Missouri law licenses suspended for former prosecutors involved in cover-up of police assault

August 13, 2019 By Brian Hauswirth

The Missouri Supreme Court has ruled that two former St. Louis assistant prosecutors violated rules of professional conduct, for their role in a 2014 cover-up of an illegal police assault in St. Louis.

The state Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion on Tuesday, that former St. Louis assistant circuit attorneys Ambry Schuessler and Katherine Dierdorf violated the rules of professional conduct.

The opinion, which is written by Judge Patricia Breckenridge, says the severity of the dishonesty of Schuessler and Dierdorf warranted the suspension of their law licenses. The two admitted to withholding their knowledge of a police detective’s beating of a suspect, and of a fellow assistant circuit attorney’s filing of false charges against the suspect.

Dierdorf’s law license has been suspended for three years, Schuessler for two years.

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case in January.

“Hailey’s Law” to become law in Missouri

July 16, 2019 By Brian Hauswirth

Legislation requiring Missouri’s Amber Alert System Oversight Committee to meet at least annually has been signed into law by Governor Mike Parson.

State Rep. Curtis Trent, R-Springfield, speaks on the Missouri House floor on May 16, 2019 in Jefferson City (file photo courtesy of Tim Bommel at House Communications)

State Rep. Curtis Trent, R-Springfield, filed “Hailey’s Law” in response to the 2014 kidnapping, rape and killing of ten-year-old Hailey Owens in Springfield. Trent notes the oversight committee hasn’t met since 2015.

“And I think in the case of a very sensitive public safety issue like this there should be at least annual meetings to make sure we’re reviewing the Amber Alert System, that we’re identifying any new technologies,” Trent says.

51-year-old Craig Wood was convicted of first degree murder and has been sentenced to death, for killing Owens. Wood’s father, Jim, testified in April that Hailey’s life could have been saved if the Amber Alert was issued earlier.

Representative Trent tells Missourinet annual meetings will help identify any new procedures that should be used to ensure alerts are issued quickly.

“Because we know the statistics have shown, the data shows, that time is critical when you have a missing person,” says Trent.

The law, which takes effect in August, requires the Amber Alert System to be integrated into the Missouri Uniform Law Enforcement System (MULES).

Trent, who was first elected to the Missouri House in 2016, has sponsored the bill for three years. It has the support of both House Speaker Elijah Haahr, R-Springfield, and House Minority Leader Crystal Quade, D-Springfield. The murder happened in Quade’s district.

The bill also allows the oversight committee to include a representative from the outdoor advertising industry. Supporters say digital highway signs can be very effective.

Wood, who’s currently incarcerated in Potosi, is appealing his death sentence. The Missouri Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case in April. The court has not issued an opinion yet.

Jim Wood and Hailey’s father, Markus, testified together during April’s hearing. They sat together in the hearing room. Both men attended Thursday’s bill-signing in Governor Parson’s office in Jefferson City.

Daughter spared when Richard Strong killed her mother, half-sister, asks Missouri governor to block his execution

June 8, 2015 By Mike Lear

The daughters of a man Missouri plans to execute Tuesday for killing his girlfriend and her 2-year-old daughter want his life spared, even though one of them was there the night of the murders.

Alyshia ,Richard, and Lauren Strong during a visit at the state prison in Potosi.

Richard Strong brutally stabbed and slashed 23-year-old Eva Washington and her 2-year-old daughter, Zandrea Thomas, to death after an argument in October of 2000. When police arrived they found the couple’s 3-month-old daughter sitting on a bed next to a pool of blood and a knife.

That daughter, Alyshia Strong, is now 14, and she is asking Governor Jay Nixon (D) to stop her father from being executed Tuesday evening. She knows some people might find that hard to understand.

“My dad is the only parent I have,” Strong told Missourinet. “I live with my grandma and she’s an amazing … she’s been amazing raising me … but my dad is my dad.”

Alyshia’s half-sister Lauren Strong, 18 and also Richard Strong’s daughter, says in spite of his having been in prison most of their lives, he has been active as their father.

“In any way he could possibly have been a part of my life, he was,” Lauren said.

The two young ladies have presented Nixon with a request for clemency for Strong. Neither daughter denies his crime or attempts to excuse it, but both say he would be punished enough if he spent the rest of his life in prison and say it would only punish them to execute him.

Lauren Strong was four at the time of the murders. She says she likes to think she knows who he is now, “or on some level, the reasons why he did what he did, and I’m not going to make any excuses. It was horrible. But it’s not for anybody else to, without sounding cliché, play God.

“There is nothing good that would come out of his execution. Absolutely not one thing I can think of that’s good. But there are a hundred bad things I can think of,” Lauren added.

In the clemency request Alyshia writes that she never asked him about the night of the murders until his execution date was set by the Missouri Supreme Court in April. She told Missourinet she put it off because she wanted to protect his feelings.

“But, if my father was going to die, I needed to know everything. I needed closure. I needed to know what happened because I didn’t want him to leave and me not be able to find out,” she said.

According to her statement in the request, he told her Washington had been abused as a child, had Multiple Personality Disorder, and said his relationship with Washington was volatile.

Eva Washington was 23 when she was murdered by Richard Strong in October, 2000. Court documents say she was stabbed 21 times, with five slash wounds, and the tip of the knife used to stab her was embedded in her skull.

“He didn’t mean to hurt anybody and he’s very sorry,” she told Missourinet. “I’m at peace now but I would rather him live than to die for something that [he] didn’t mean to happen.”

She said in her statement she still isn’t ready to ask why he spared her on the night of the murders, and hopes he won’t be executed so some day, she can.

Strong’s mother, Joyce Knox, is Alyshia’s legal guardian. She says Richard Strong calls Alyshia two or three times a week.

“I know they talk about important things – the same kinds of things a father would talk to his daughter about if he were living at home with her,” she writes in her statement in the clemency request. “Even though he is in prison, Richard is a very good father – he always has been.”

“At one time Richard was going to church with me, and by me being a minister he thought that he could go to Heaven off of mama’s coattails, but I know now that Richard has truly found God in his life,” Knox told Missourinet. “And he’s helped a lot of other people that are in prison with him to find God and he’s changed so much.”

She added tearfully, “I don’t want to see him die.”

Two-year-old Zandrea Thomas was stabbed nine times and had 12 slash wounds inflicted by Richard Strong.

Nixon has heard from the families, attorneys, and friends of some of the other men that have been executed in Missouri since late 2013 that those men had found religion and were positive influences on those with them in prison, as well as claims regarding some of those men’s competency to be executed – one of the claims raised now by Strong’s attorneys in seeking to keep him from being executed. Nixon has also been told that some of those men were abused as children, as has been said of Strong. None of those arguments has dissuaded Nixon from allowing any given to proceed.

Strong’s attorneys are seeking to block his execution on several other fronts, as well, including arguing that the jury was not properly instructed in how it had to consider the factors that prosecutors raised as arguments that he should receive the death penalty.

If those efforts ultimately fail, Strong will die by lethal injection at the state prison at Bonne Terre between Tuesday at 6 p.m. and Wednesday at 5:59 p.m. His would be the fourth execution carried out in Missouri this year and the 16th since Missouri resumed conducting executions on a regular basis, and began scheduling one per month in November, 2013.

Attempts to reach the family of Eva Washington and Zandrea Thomas for this story have been unsuccessful.

Supreme Court hears gun rights amendment arguments

July 15, 2014 By Mike Lear

The Missouri Supreme Court has heard arguments on whether what appears on next month’s ballot about a proposed gun rights amendment says all it should say.

The Missouri Supreme Court Building in Jefferson City

The Court has been asked to consider whether the title and ballot summary that voters will see next month for Constitutional Amendment 5 tells them enough about what it will do by making gun rights “unalienable.”

Attorney Chuck Hatfield asks whether voters know that would mean holding those rights to the highest legal scrutiny.

“Saying ‘unalienable’ tells us nothing,” argues Hatfield. “It tells the voters nothing about the change that we’re making to the Constitution.”

Senator Kurt Schaefer (R-Columbia), an attorney, sponsored the measure in the legislature. He argues to the Court that it would put Missouri in line with rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court.

“It’s an individual right that is unalienable. It gets the highest level of review from this court,” says Schaefer. “Basically when this court is presented with those questions, and I can’t speculate on those, what they would be, but it is going to be a decision for this court of what meets that standard and what does not.”

Read the ballot language (scroll down to “Constitutional Amendment 5”)

Attorneys for the state and the backers of the ballot language say the challenge should be tossed out because of a statutory deadline barring changes to ballots within six weeks before an election, and say that absentee ballots have already been cast. They say those ballots could be invalidated if the issue’s language is changed.

Hatfield says it isn’t the job of the Supreme Court to worry about those ballots.

“If this measure passes 70 [percent] to 30 [percent] it won’t matter. If this measure fails 70 [percent] to 30 [percent] it won’t matter,” argues Hatfield. “If it’s close it’s going to matter and we may be back [in front of the Supreme Court], but today it doesn’t matter.”

Additionally, Hatfield says if his clients’ case against that language is ruled to be moot, they will have been disenfranchised because he could not have acted earlier.

“The reason we got here when we did, the reason we got to the trial court before 60 days, is because everyone doubletimed it,” says Hatfield. “The Secretary of State issued their certification early, the Auditor issued their summary statement early, we filed suit on the afternoon of the day that the Secretary certified the initiative, we were in court on the next business day. Your honor, if this case is moot, I don’t know what else to do for my clients.”

The Court is also asked to consider, if it decides ballot language is inadequate, whether it can provide new language or whether it can simply remove the issue from the ballot altogether.

It could issue a ruling at any time.

Death penalty opponent, analyst consider reasons for limit to MO executions

July 8, 2014 By Mike Lear

The Corrections Department asked the State Supreme Court not to ask it to carry out more than one execution per month. The Supreme Court has honored that request and changed its own rules to reflect it.

Missouri executed two inmates at the same time on four occasions in its gas chamber between 1938 and 1953. (photo courtesy; Adam Roberts)

A Corrections spokesman hasn’t acknowledged the request was made, but some who watch how the death penalty is carried out in Missouri have ideas why it was made.

Rita Linhardt chairs the board of Missourians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty. She thinks one group the change would benefit would be the Corrections Department’s employees.

“The people down at Bonne Terre who are actually carrying out the executions,” Linhardt refers to specifically. “I would imagine that an execution is very disruptive to the normal prison routine, and so I would think the DOC needs time to prepare for this not just only logistically but also emotionally … so I would think this ruling of having no more than one a month would help in some way those type of burdens on DOC workers.”

A spokesman at the Missouri Correctional Officers Association says it has no comment on the rule change.

Linhardt thinks the one-per-month limit could also benefit attorneys who represent clients who are under a death sentence, who often represent multiple clients.

“They don’t even one want one (execution) a month, but the possibility that you could be facing two of your clients in the same month … I just think would be terribly emotionally draining,” says Linhardt.

Attorney John Mills is an attorney participating in a Saint Louis University law school study of the death penalty in Missouri. He says the Department could be sensing that Missourians’ limits would be tested by more frequent executions.

“The public may have a limit in what they will tolerate in terms of executions, and (the Department) may be feeling some pressure or may sense that the public may not be willing to tolerate more than one execution per month,” Mills tells Missourinet.

Mills concedes that it could be a matter of budgeting or staffing for the Department that makes multiple executions in a month too taxing on resources, though a Department spokesman declined to comment on whether that is a factor.

The rule change was ordered by Chief Justice Mary R. Russell. No commentary was provided explaining the rationale behind it.

Missouri currently has 41 men under a death sentence, meaning it would take at least three-and-a-half years for Missouri to execute all the men currently sentenced to death in the state.

Even before the rule took effect Missouri has been scheduling one execution every month since November 2013, with only one having been blocked by the courts. Executions have been scheduled to take place July 16 and August 6.

Missouri has not historically placed such limits on executions, though the last time two inmates were executed in the same month was in October, 2001, when Michael Roberts was executed on the October 3 and Stephen Johns was executed 21 days later.

On four occasions between 1938 and 1953 Missouri executed two people at the same time using lethal gas. Prior to 1938 when the state’s death penalty was carried out by hanging, sometimes two or more condemned individuals would be hung alongside each other.

Supreme Court throws Royals mascot hot dog throwing case back to lower court

June 24, 2014 By Mike Lear

A man hit in the eye with a hot dog thrown by the Royals mascot will have another chance to sue the team’s organization.

Kansas City Royals mascot Sluggerrr

The state Supreme Court has voided the decision of a jury that put the blame for the injury on the man, John Coomer. The Court says it should not have been left up to a jury to decide whether the risk of being injured by a thrown hot dog is inherent to watching a baseball game. It says that should be up to a court to decide.

The decision means the case could be retried.

Coomer was hit by a hot dog thrown by Sluggerrr at a game on September 8, 2009. He said he had to undergo surgery for a detached retina and a cataract and sued for damages, claiming negligence.