 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Pettry11/28/2005
2000. When such a requirement is imposed, "the issue [of good cause] is not submitted to the trier of fact unless supported by evidence[.]" Section 556.051.1, RSMo 2000.
Defendant maintains that he injected the issue of good cause by presenting evidence that he suffered a back injury in 1996, subsequently re-injured his back, and "requested disability." Defendant contends that it was the State's burden to prove that his failure to provide support was without good cause.
On August 16, 1996, Defendant's physical therapist listed "return to work" as a long-term goal for his recovery. Four days later, St. John's Medcenter recommended Defendant take ten days off from work. Later that same month, medical doctors indicated Defendant could do desk work until his therapy was completed. Other than an exam in 1997, there is no further evidence regarding this injury until 2001, when a physician recommended therapy but said nothing about employability. Nothing is offered on Defendant's condition during the year of 2000.
In State v. Morovitz. 867 S.W.2d 506 (Mo.banc 1994), the Court determined that the defendant failed to meet his burden of injecting the issue of good cause for failure to provide adequate support, as provided in section 568.040.3, in that defendant's evidence of a situation existing in 1986 was irrelevant to the issue of defendant's failure to provide support during 1988 as charged. Id. at 509. Here, Defendant's evidence on his ability to work, including his medical records, is similarly irrelevant.
Defendant has failed to inject the issue of good cause. Therefore, the State is not required to prove Defendant's failure to provide adequate support for his children was without good cause. State v. Degraffenreid, 877 S.W.2d 210, 214 (Mo.App. 1994). Defendant's only point has no merit.
The judgment is affirmed.
|