Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Livingston-Rivard

Court of Appeals of Missouri, Southern District, Second Division

May 20, 2015

STATE OF MISSOURI, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
JANICE A. LIVINGSTON-RIVARD, Defendant-Appellant

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PULASKI COUNTY. Honorable Robert D. Schollmeyer.

FOR APPELLANT: EMMETT D. QUEENER, Columbia, MO.

FOR RESPONDENT: ADAM S. ROWLEY, Jefferson City, MO.

MARY W. SHEFFIELD, P.J. -- OPINION AUTHOR. GARY W. LYNCH, J. -- CONCURS. DON E. BURRELL, J. -- CONCURS.

OPINION

MARY W. SHEFFIELD, P.J.

Page 464

Janice A. Livingston-Rivard (" Defendant" ) appeals from her conviction of one count of financial exploitation of the elderly. Defendant argues that there was insufficient evidence to support her conviction and that the trial court erred in overruling three hearsay objections Defendant

Page 465

made at trial. Defendant's claims are without merit, and her conviction and sentence are affirmed.

Factual and Procedural Background

Aften Ambrose (" Victim" ) and his wife lived in a 1994 Belmont mobile home. Around 2005 or 2006 when Victim was in his 80s, Victim's health began to decline and he was diagnosed with dementia and Alzheimer's. On April 15, 2008, Victim attempted suicide by shooting himself and was hospitalized.

Upon his recovery, Victim returned home. Defendant, who was employed as a barmaid at a local VFW, then became involved in Victim's day-to-day life. One day, a next-door neighbor and friend of Victim, Angie Patterson, overheard a conversation between Defendant and Victim while at Victim's home. Defendant told Victim that he and his wife needed to transfer their property to Defendant so the state would not take it away when Victim and his wife had to enter a nursing home. On another occasion, Ms. Patterson encountered Victim with a large amount of cash in his possession. Ms. Patterson told Victim he should put the money in the bank. Victim responded that he did not want to put the money in the bank because Defendant would get it. In another conversation, Victim told Ms. Patterson he and his wife had nothing left because Defendant had taken it all. A nephew of Victim, Wayne Russell, stated Victim said he could not go to breakfast with Mr. Russell without Defendant's permission.

During that same time period, Victim began to dispose of his property. On July 13, 2008, Defendant purchased Victim's van for $100.00. On August 19, 2009, Victim gave Defendant the 1994 Belmont mobile home. On October 11, 2009, Victim gave Defendant a 1968 Ford automobile.

When Mr. Russell questioned Defendant about these transfers, Defendant advised him she was a state employee who had been appointed to take care of Victim and Victim's wife. When a nun attempted to contact Victim regarding proceeds from the estate of Victim's deceased sister, Defendant also told ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.