JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. – This week, the Supreme Court of Missouri offered hand downs in three cases.
In State of Missouri v. Angelo Johnson, Johnson appealed a decision made in the circuit court that found him to be a predatory sexual offender. The Supreme Court heard and considered the decision and ultimately found him to be guilty of the original charges. Johnson brought his case to the Court because he was charged for acts that happened in the past and not the what was being charged against him. The Supreme Court found that while the circuit court had made an error in timing, it did not result in manifest injustice. The charges brought against him were enough to classify him as a predatory sexual offender. Johnson will serve eight consecutive life sentences and is eligible for parole after 25.
In Tivol Plaza Inc. v. Missouri Commission on Human Rights, Karen Norton attempted to sue the company that fired her, Tivol Plaza. The company claims that they fired her for failing to meet sales objectives, while Norton claimed she was discriminated against. The following month, she filed a discrimination charge with Missouri Commission on Human Rights. Tivol asked the Commission that they dismiss any claims she made 6 months before she filed her charge. Norton then attempted to terminate the proceedings and issued a right-to-sue letter. Tivol challenged the letter by asking for a writ from the circuit court. Tivol appealed the court’s decision to dismiss the case. The Supreme Court decided 5-1 to agree with the circuit court’s decision to dismiss the case. The Supreme Court determined that lower court correctly dismissed the case in accordance with state law.
Finally, in Barbara Bartlett, et al. v. Missouri Department of Insurance and Chlora Lindley-Myers, Barlett and Shawn Hernandez filed a petition demanding the state to pay their pension and lost wages, after being fired from their state jobs. Instead of filing their case as a writ, they incorrectly filed it as a regular case. The state argued that the case should be dismissed because Bartlett and Hernandez did not follow procedure and the circuit court agreed. In doing so, they did not follow proper procedure. When Bartlett and Hernandez appealed the decision, the Supreme Court unanimously voted to dismiss the case because neither followed the state’s requirements and therefore the case was not capable of being appealed.
Michael Layer is a reporter for the Missouri Times and the Missouri Times Magazine. He joined the Missouri Times in August 2017 after graduating from Goucher College the previous May. To contact Michael, email michael@themissouritimes.com or follow him on Twitter @_MichaelLayer
