•  
  •  
 

Authors

Lauren Vincent

Abstract

This Note scrutinizes the way in which the Supreme Court of Missouri resolved the issue of whether the predatory sexual offender statute, section 566.125.5(3), is constitutional when applied to currently charged acts in light of the procedural mandates for sentence enhancement provided in section 558.021.2. This Note argues the Supreme Court of Missouri erred in its interpretation of the statutory language provided in section 566.125.5(3) and in its application of Alleyne precedent. This Note further argues the Supreme Court of Missouri failed to recognize the manifest injustice that resulted when the trial court disregarded the statutory timing requirements that should have been followed in order to extend Johnson’s sentence pursuant to the predatory sexual offender provisions.

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.