{"id":6930,"date":"2024-10-15T08:00:00","date_gmt":"2024-10-15T13:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/hoorfarlaw.com\/blog\/?p=6930"},"modified":"2024-10-14T10:42:50","modified_gmt":"2024-10-14T15:42:50","slug":"taser-was-a-dangerous-instrument","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/hoorfarlaw.com\/blog\/?p=6930","title":{"rendered":"Taser was a dangerous instrument\u00a0"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><a href=\"http:\/\/hoorfarlaw.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Danger.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"293\" height=\"183\" src=\"http:\/\/hoorfarlaw.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Danger.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-6931\"\/><\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>A felony assault in the first degree required knowing, substantial step toward a substantial risk of death or protracted loss or impairment of the body. The defendant\u2019s conduct raised a presumption that the\u00a0defendant intended the natural and probable consequences. The state showed that a taser can be lethal, especially when used without training, so a jury could find that a taser was a dangerous instrument. The defendant used the taser to cause the\u00a0victim to lose control of the\u00a0victim\u2019s upper body in the course of attempting to escape custody. The victim was a corrections employee. The circuit court did not err in convicting the\u00a0defendant of first-degree assault on a special victim and armed criminal action.\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.courts.mo.gov\/file.jsp?id=213373\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><em>STATE OF MISSOURI, Plaintiff-Respondent vs. MICHAEL RAY DURISON, Defendant-Appellant<\/em>\u00a0<\/a><br><br>If you feel you have been wrongfully convicted of a crime, call us today 816-944-0251!<br><br><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>A felony assault in the first degree required knowing, substantial step toward a substantial risk of death or protracted loss or impairment of the body. The defendant\u2019s conduct raised a presumption that the\u00a0defendant intended the natural and probable consequences. The &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/hoorfarlaw.com\/blog\/?p=6930\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6930","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/hoorfarlaw.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6930","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/hoorfarlaw.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/hoorfarlaw.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hoorfarlaw.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hoorfarlaw.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=6930"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/hoorfarlaw.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6930\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6932,"href":"https:\/\/hoorfarlaw.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6930\/revisions\/6932"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/hoorfarlaw.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=6930"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hoorfarlaw.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=6930"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hoorfarlaw.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=6930"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}