From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Conklin

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five
Oct 20, 1998
980 S.W.2d 129 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998)

Opinion

No. 72805.

OPINION FILED: October 20, 1998.

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF LINCOLN COUNTY, HON. FRED RUSH, JUDGE.

Susan L. Hogan, Appellate Defender, Kansas City, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, Theodore A. Bruce, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, for respondent.


Defendant appeals conviction and sentence on charge of tampering with a judicial officer. Section 565.084 RSMo 1994. She was a co-defendant in the trial we reviewed in State v. Cella, et. al., 976 S.W.2d 543 (Mo.App.E.D. 1998) (Slip Op. 72054 decided July 7, 1998).

Defendant presents four arguments to support a new trial. One of her points is the trial court erred in not recusing himself pursuant to a timely Rule 32.07 motion. The relevant facts on this issue are identical with those considered in Cella. We adopt the conclusions and holding of that opinion.

We reverse and remand for a new trial before another judge.

ROBERT G. DOWD, Jr., C.J. and CHARLES B. BLACKMAR, Senior Judge, concur.


Summaries of

State v. Conklin

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five
Oct 20, 1998
980 S.W.2d 129 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998)
Case details for

State v. Conklin

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF MISSOURI, RESPONDENT, v. IMA DEANA CONKLIN, APPELLANT

Court:Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five

Date published: Oct 20, 1998

Citations

980 S.W.2d 129 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998)