{"disclaimer":"This is a summary of public court records and is not legal advice. Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.","party":{"slug":"rodney-a-smith","displayName":"Rodney A. Smith","totalCases":2},"cases":[{"caseId":"mo:sc99086:2022-01-11","opinionId":"74c12353-5f12-5d02-834a-3f0aad5f87a2","slug":"state-of-missouri-respondent-v-rodney-a-smith-appellant-c99086","caseName":"State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. Rodney A. Smith, Appellant.","caseNumber":"SC99086","court":"mo","courtLabel":"Supreme Court of Missouri","decisionDate":"2022-01-11","year":2022,"display_summary":"Rodney A. Smith was convicted of statutory rape. On appeal, Smith argued the circuit court violated his constitutional right to confrontation by allowing a DNA analyst to testify via two-way live video. The Missouri Supreme Court reversed the conviction and remanded the case, holding that the admission of virtual testimony from a non-victim, non-child witness without an express finding of unavailability was erroneous and not harmless, as it was the only physical evidence linking Smith to the crime.","primaryTopic":"criminal-procedure","topicSlugs":["criminal-procedure","evidence","appellate-procedure","standard-of-review"],"outcomeNorm":"mixed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=183376","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/state-of-missouri-respondent-v-rodney-a-smith-appellant-c99086","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"criminal-law","label":"Criminal Law","href":"/practice-areas/criminal-law","score":36,"source":"tag","evidence":["tag: criminal-law","topic: criminal-procedure","text: state of missouri","text: conviction"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/criminal-law"},{"slug":"litigation","label":"Civil Litigation","href":"/practice-areas/litigation","score":12,"source":"topic","evidence":["topic: evidence","topic: appellate-procedure"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/litigation"}],"role":"appellant"},{"caseId":"moappd:ed108626:2021-04-27","opinionId":"a01e734d-43f4-5f81-9e34-74278a7e17dc","slug":"state-of-missouri-respondent-v-rodney-a-smith-appellant-108626","caseName":"State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Rodney A. Smith, Appellant.","caseNumber":"ED108626","court":"moappd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District","decisionDate":"2021-04-27","year":2021,"display_summary":"Rodney A. Smith appealed his convictions for statutory rape, arguing that the trial court erred in admitting hearsay testimony and allowing a DNA analyst to testify via two-way video, violating his confrontation rights. The appellate court found no plain error in the admission of hearsay to explain police conduct and concluded that the two-way video testimony, given the witness's unavailability due to FMLA leave, preserved Smith's Sixth Amendment confrontation rights. While the court would have affirmed the judgment, it transferred the case to the Supreme Court of Missouri due to the general interest and importance of the issues surrounding virtual testimony in criminal trials.","primaryTopic":"criminal-procedure","topicSlugs":["criminal-procedure","evidence","appellate-procedure","standard-of-review"],"outcomeNorm":"transferred","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=177034","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/state-of-missouri-respondent-v-rodney-a-smith-appellant-108626","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"criminal-law","label":"Criminal Law","href":"/practice-areas/criminal-law","score":36,"source":"tag","evidence":["tag: criminal-law","topic: criminal-procedure","text: state of missouri","text: criminal"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/criminal-law"},{"slug":"litigation","label":"Civil Litigation","href":"/practice-areas/litigation","score":12,"source":"topic","evidence":["topic: evidence","topic: appellate-procedure"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/litigation"}],"role":"appellant"}]}