Electronic Images Support Convictions
Evidence that appellant capturing certain images of partial nudity supported convictions, for abuse of a child by recording image for sexual gratification, and second-degree invasion of privacy by recording without knowledge.  Testimony denying intent does not require reversal.  Failure to raise constitutional challenge waives it.
STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent vs. KEVIN T. BROWNING, Appellant
Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District – SD30991

Fourth Amendment Protects Text Messages
Cell phone owner has reasonable expectation of privacy subject to Fourth Amendment protections that phone company’s ability to access does not negate.  “Callers have long enjoyed Fourth Amendment protection of the information they communicate over the phone. We see no reason why the same information communicated textually from that same device should receive any less protection under the Fourth Amendment.”  Fourth Amendment does not require warrant for investigative subpoena but does require investigative subpoena to have reasonable limitations in scope and relevance in purpose.  “[T]he State issued each consecutive subpoena because [respondent] made no admission within the time specified in the previous subpoena. If no evidence with which to charge [respondent] had come about, presumably the State would still be issuing subpoenas periodically in the hope of securing something it could use against him.”  Exclusionary rule has exceptions based on police conduct but “a conscious and considered decision made by a” prosecutor is not among them.
State of Missouri vs. James Arthur Clampitt
(Overview Summary)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District – WD73943

One Unanimous Verdict on Undifferentiated Acts
Charging instrument alleged, and evidence showed, multiple acts but verdict director did not describe them individually.  Such instruction was not plain error, because statute defined offense as a course of conduct, so whichever conduct jurors found, their verdict was unanimous.  Kidnapping instructions required jurors to find all elements so omission of conjunction between elements was not plain error.
State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. Joshua A. Miner, Appellant.
(Overview Summary) 
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District – ED96594

Identification of Defendant was Sufficient
Stipulation and testimony showed that defendant was driver accused of offense.  Statute providing that evidence “shall include but not be limited to” certain documents represents a non‑exclusive list. “[T]he legislature recognized that other sources of evidence would contain sufficient indicia of reliability[.]”
STATE OF MISSOURI, Plaintiff-Respondent vs. ZACK RANDALL GRAVES, Defendant-Appellant
Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District – SD31373

Evidence of Violence Supports Convictions
Evidence of actual violence supported finding of substantial risk needed to for child endangerment conviction.  “Substantial” means “not seeming or imaginary: not illusive [.]” Evidence of threats following actual violence supported a finding of coercion needed for kidnapping conviction.
State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Raymon C. Harrell, Appellant.
(Overview Summary)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District – ED95363

Walls Do Not a Building Make
Statute defines second degree burglary to include unlawfully entering a building to commit a crime.  Appellant stole copper wire from truck that was in a shelter.  Shelter had roof, one complete wall, two half-walls, and one partial wall.  Even without door or window, truck shelter constituted a building.
State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Anthony Collins, Appellant.
(Overview Summary)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District – ED96069