The delay from charges to trial did not reach the threshold of a presumptive violation of the right to a speedy trial, so no further analysis of other factors was necessary, and circuit court did not err in denying defendant\u2019s motion to dismiss. \u201cThe State has the burden of production and persuasion to show by a preponderance of the evidence that a defendant\u2019s motion to suppress should be overruled at trial.\u201d A confession is involuntary and subject to exclusion when obtained by coercion, determined by a totality of circumstances, either physical or psychological. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Physical factors include length of detention, duration of questioning, and deprivation of food or sleep. Psychological factors include age, experience, intelligence, gender, degree of education, infirmity, unusual susceptibility to coercion, advisement of rights, demeanor of interrogators, and restraints on defendant. Deception does not render defendant\u2019s confession involuntary \u201cunless the deception offends societal notions of fairness or is likely to produce an untrustworthy confession.\u201d Promises of leniency render a confession involuntary but defendant\u2019s hope for leniency, or divine forgiveness, does not. Circuit court did not err in denying defendant\u2019s motion to suppress.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n
STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent vs. ERIC A. HINES, Appellant<\/em><\/a> If you’re interested in speaking with an attorney, call our office at 816-524-4949 or click here <\/a>to schedule a consultation. <\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The delay from charges to trial did not reach the threshold of a presumptive violation of the right to a speedy trial, so no further analysis of other factors was necessary, and circuit court did not err in denying defendant\u2019s … Continue reading
Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District \u2013 SD37164<\/p>\n\n\n\n