State v. Tunstall

619 S.W.2d 71, 1981 Mo. LEXIS 377
Supreme Court of Missouri·Decided July 14, 1981·No. No. 63229·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinions

Reexamination on order of the United States Supreme Court

PER CURIAM:

This case together with several others1 was ordered reexamined in light of Alber[72] naz v. United States, 450 U.S. -, 101 S.Ct. 1137, 67 L.Ed.2d 275 (1981). Since all of the courts of appeals rulings were based upon our ruling in Sours v. State, 593 S.W.2d 208 (Mo.banc 1980) (Sours I) or Sours v. State, 603 S.W.2d 592 (Mo.banc 1980) (Sours II), the cases were all ordered transferred to this Court. Our examination of the double jeopardy issue made in light of Albernaz pursuant to the orders of the United States Supreme Court, appears in State v. Haggard, 619 S.W.2d 44 (Mo.banc No. 62227), decided July 14, 1981.

The original opinion filed by the Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, State v. Tunstall, 607 S.W.2d 809 (Mo.App.1980), is approved and affirmed and by reference made a part of this opinion. Sours v. State, 603 S.W.2d 592 (Mo. banc 1980) (Sours II), cert, denied, Missouri v. Sours, - U.S. -, 101 S.Ct. 953, 67 L.Ed.2d 118 (1981); and State v. Haggard, 619 S.W.2d 44 (Mo. banc 1981).

Appellant’s conviction of and sentence for attempted first degree robbery is affirmed. Appellant’s conviction of and sentence for armed criminal action is reversed.

DONNELLY, C. J., and SEILER, WEL-LIYER, MORGAN, HIGGINS and BARD-GETT, JJ., concur.

RENDLEN, J., concurs in part and dissents in part in separate opinion filed.

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

State v. Tunstall, 619 S.W.2d 71, 1981 Mo. LEXIS 377 (Mo. 1981).

619 S.W.2d 71 (State v. Tunstall) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State Ex Rel. Bulloch v. Seier
771 S.W.2d 71 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1989)
Missouri v. Haggard
459 U.S. 1192 (Supreme Court, 1983)