SC96739
Donald Hill, et al. v. Missouri Department of Conservation, et al.
Gasconade County
Challenge to regulations purporting to govern captive cervid industry
Listen to the oral argument: SC96739 MP3 file
The conservation commission was represented during arguments by William Ray Price Jr. of Armstrong Teasdale LLP in St. Louis; the industry participants were represented by Jean Paul Bradshaw of Lathrop Gage LLP in Kansas City.

Under article IV, section 40(a) of the state constitution, the state’s conservation commission regulates the state’s bird, fish, game, forestry and wildlife resources, acting through the state’s conservation department. Since 1985, the commission has permitted hunting preserves to hold white-tailed deer, which, along with elk, are of a species commonly called “cervids.” Participants in a “captive cervid industry” engage in activities such as breeding cervids and operating preserves where people can hunt deer, elk and other cervids. Cervids can be infected with chronic wasting disease, a fatal neurodegenerative disease, which first was detected in Missouri in 2010 at a private hunting preserve in Linn County. Since then, the commission has detected additional deer that tested positive, post-mortem, for the disease. In October 2014, the commission enacted a series of amendments regulating the possession, importation, and maintenance and veterinary inspection of cervids to help combat the disease. The next month, certain participants in Missouri’s captive cervid industry sued the department, the commission and the commission’s members (collectively, the commission), alleging the commission lacked authority to enact the challenged regulations. In November 2016, the circuit court entered an amended judgment in favor of the industry participants, permanently enjoining the conservation department from enforcing the challenged regulations. The department appeals.

This appeal presents several questions for the Court. One involves whether captive cervids constitute “game” or “wildlife resources of the state” over which the commission has regulatory authority and whether the commission has authority to regulate captive cervids. Other questions involve whether the captive cervid industry participants are engaged in “farming” or “ranching” practices included within the state constitution’s “right to farm;” whether this right to farm is subject to the commission’s constitutional powers; whether the challenged regulations can help control the spread of chronic wasting disease; and whether the challenged regulations unduly burden any right to farm the industry participants might have, are rationally related to a legitimate state interest or are narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling state interest. An alternative question is whether the circuit court’s injunction is overbroad and void or otherwise improperly extends to enjoin enforcement of the challenged regulations statewide as to all persons, including those who were not parties to the industry participants’ challenge.

SC96739_MO_Conservation_et_al._brief
SC96739_Captive_Cervid_Industry_Participants_brief

SC96739_MO_Conservation_et_al._reply_brief

 
SC96516
State ex rel. Joshua D. Hawley v. The Honorable Sandra C. Midkiff and Mary Marquez
Jackson County
Proper venue for habeas challenge to conviction and sentence
Listen to the oral argument: SC96516 MP3 file
The attorney general was represented during arguments by State Solicitor D. John Sauer of the attorney general’s office in Jefferson City; Kidd was represented by Sean O’Brien of the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law.

Ricky Kidd was convicted of two counts each of first-degree murder and armed criminal action in February 1996 in Jackson County, and he was sentenced to consecutive terms of life in prison (without parole for the murder convictions and with parole for the armed criminal action convictions). The judgment was affirmed on appeal. During postconviction relief proceedings, the state dismissed the armed criminal action counts, and Kidd was resentenced to two terms of life in prison without the possibility of parole for the murder convictions. He was denied other postconviction relief, and the federal courts subsequently denied habeas relief. He is serving his sentence at the Crossroads Correctional Center in DeKalb County. In December 2013, Kidd filed a motion in Jackson County seeking DNA testing, and he was transferred there for a hearing on his motion. Within days of arriving in Jackson County, Kidd filed a petition there seeking habeas relief from his judgment of conviction and sentence, alleging he is innocent. No substantive proceedings appear to have occurred since then in the DNA case. The attorney general entered the habeas case and moved to transfer it to DeKalb County and to substitute the prison warden there as respondent in place of the county corrections center’s director. In November 2014, the circuit court removed the director but declined to substitute the warden, leaving no respondent, and declined to change venue. The attorney general’s office seeks this Court’s relief

This case presents one question for the Court – whether the circuit court in DeKalb County, where Kidd is serving his sentence, or Jackson County, where he was moved temporarily and apparently still is located, has authority to proceed in Kidd’s habeas case. A related issue is whether the passage of time in seeking this writ constitutes waiver of the venue objection.

SC96516_Attorney_General_brief
SC96516_Kidd_brief
SC96516_Attorney_General_reply_brief

SC96516_Attorney_General_ltr_correcting_reply_brief

 
 
SC96601
State of Missouri ex rel. Shayne Healea v. The Honorable Frederick P. Tucker
Shelby County