STATE v. HIGGINS (2026)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Dustin HIGGINS, Appellant.

WD 87718

Decided: October 27, 2026

Before Division One: Alok Ahuja, Presiding Judge, Thomas N. Chapman, Judge, and Janet Sutton, Judge

Desiree Walden-Chastain, Kansas City, MO, for Appellant Kristen Johnson, Jefferson City, MO, for Respondent

ORDER

Dustin Higgins appeals his convictions for assault in the first degree, armed criminal action, and resisting arrest following a jury trial. In five points on appeal, he challenges the admission of various text messages and testimony and the prosecutor's closing argument. He also filed a motion to remand the case to the trial court to consider newly discovered evidence, which was taken with the case. Because a published opinion would have no jurisprudential purpose, a memorandum explaining the reasons for this decision is provided to the parties. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 30.25(b). The motion to remand to consider newly discovered evidence is denied.

Per Curiam:

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network