SB 1697 - This act shall be known and may be cited as the "Anti-Epstein Child Protection Act". This act provides that the death penalty may be sought for the offenses of statutory rape in the first degree and sexual trafficking of a child in the first degree. If the death penalty is not waived by the state, the trial shall proceed in two stages before the same trier of fact. In the first stage, the trier shall determine whether the defendant is guilty. In the second stage, if the trier found the defendant guilty of statutory rape in the first degree or sexual trafficking of a child in the first degree, the trier shall assess and determine the punishment. If the trier finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant is intellectually disabled, there is a mitigation of punishment, or the trier decides not to declare a punishment of death, then a punishment at life imprisonment without eligibility for parole shall be declared. If the trier is a jury and it is unable to decide upon the punishment, the judge shall determine the punishment. This act shall only apply to offenses committed on or after August 28, 2026. This act is identical to SB 196 (2025) and SB 951 (2024). TRISTAN BENSON, JR.
SB 1437 - This act modifies and creates provisions relating to charging and sentencing repeat offenders. Prosecuting attorneys are required to execute and enforce criminal laws regarding repeat offenders. This act also establishes guidelines for the charging and removal of a prosecutor that fails to charge, plead, or prove a defendant's eligibility for an enhancement, or fails to abide by plea restrictions also created by this act. The Attorney General has the authority to file a civil complaint against a prosecuting attorney to remove such prosecuting attorney from office. This act requires circuit judges to abide by enhancement provisions for eligible defendants or forfeit rights to their office. The Attorney General is authorized to initiate quo warranto proceedings against a circuit judge that forfeits rights to their office subject to this provision. Under this act, when a person is found guilty of an offense and sentenced to an extended imprisonment, their offense shall be recorded as an offense of the class of the extended sentence. This act establishes a prohibition of plea agreements for defendants that are charged with certain enumerated crimes, or are eligible for enhancement, unless there is insufficient evidence to prove the case, and the prosecutor provides a written statement regarding the good faith justification for the plea agreement. The current sentencing ranges for felony classes are modified as follows: • Class A felony increased to fifteen years to forty years, from ten years to thirty years; • Class B felony increased to ten years to twenty years, from five years to fifteen years; • Class C felony increased to five years to fifteen years, from three years to ten years; • Class D felony increased to three years to ten years, from a maximum of seven years; and • Class E felony increased to two to five years, from a maximum of four years. This act repeals the court's discretion to sentence a person convicted of a class D or E felony to less than one year in the county jail. Under this act, a prior felony offender that is found guilty of a class A felony shall be sentenced to the maximum term of imprisonment for a class A felony that is not life imprisonment. A persistent felony offender, as defined in the act, that is found guilty of a class A felony shall be sentenced to life imprisonment. Further, this act requires that a prior felony offender that has been found guilty of a class B, C, D, or E felony shall be sentenced to the maximum term of imprisonment, except life imprisonment, for the class that is one class higher than the offense for which they are found guilty. A persistent felony offender that is found guilty of a class B, C, D, or E felony shall be sentenced to the maximum term of imprisonment, including life imprisonment, for the class that is two classes higher than the offense for which they are found guilty. This act provides that a persistent misdemeanor offender, as defined in the act, who is found guilty of a class A, B, or C misdemeanor shall be sentenced to the maximum term of imprisonment for a class E felony. Under this act, a person that receives an enhanced sentence shall not serve a term of imprisonment less than the maximum term of imprisonment allowable under law. In addition, such person shall not be eligible to have their sentence suspended, waived, or reduced by any means, including by the Parole Board. This act has a severability clause and an emergency clause. TRISTAN BENSON, JR.
The bill's official abstract ("Modifies and creates new provisions relating to illegal immigrants") provides no substantive details about its content, provisions, or intended effects. No specific mechanisms, affected groups, or policy changes are described in the available information. Since the bill is only at the "S First Read" stage (2026-02-26) with no further details provided, a meaningful summary cannot be generated. The abstract alone is insufficient to describe what the bill does or who it would affect.
HB 3252 establishes procedures for evaluating whether criminal defendants lack mental capacity to understand trial proceedings or assist in their defense. It requires courts to appoint qualified mental health professionals (psychiatrists, psychologists, or physicians with specific training) to conduct evaluations when a judge suspects incapacity, with one free pretrial evaluation provided by the state. The evaluation reports must include specific opinions on the defendant's mental fitness, recommendations for treatment or custody, and conditions for community-based treatment if appropriate. This directly affects defendants in criminal cases who may have mental health conditions impacting their trial participation. The bill standardizes court evaluations and reporting requirements to determine if a defendant can proceed with their trial or requires treatment.
HB 3468 requires Missouri circuit courts with treatment court divisions to appoint a treatment court commissioner (not administrator, as titled) if approved by the court and funds are available. The commissioner, appointed by a majority of circuit judges for four years, would handle treatment court cases with powers similar to an associate circuit judge but must have their rulings confirmed by a judge. This position would be funded through court appropriations or other sources, with reimbursement to the state if non-state funds cover compensation. The bill creates a staffing structure for treatment courts but does not mandate new programs or change existing treatment services.
HB 3423 requires judges and certain state/local officials to recuse themselves from cases where they have close family relationships with a party (including relatives up to cousins) or received anything of value from a party. It specifically applies to judges, court officials, state executive branch leaders (like the governor's chief aides), and many elected or appointed officials in local governments and public entities. The bill establishes clear rules for when recusal is required and allows judges to disqualify themselves or transfer cases without party consent. It also clarifies that financial interest filings for these officials must be submitted to designated state or local filing officers. This bill modifies existing ethics rules to expand the scope of mandatory disqualification for judicial and public officials.
HB 3389 makes it a serious criminal offense to threaten, harass, or intimidate a judicial officer or their family. It specifically prohibits actions like sharing personal information (e.g., home address, Social Security number), threats, stalking, or offering benefits to influence their work. The law covers judges, court staff, probation officers, and their spouses, children, or ancestors, with penalties rising to a more severe felony if injury or death occurs. This expands legal protections for court personnel facing harassment, particularly online targeting.
SB 1494 would automatically remove certain criminal records from public access without requiring individuals to file a court petition. It specifically targets non-violent offenses that have been resolved, directly affecting people convicted of those offenses who would no longer need to navigate a legal process to clear their records. The bill establishes clear, standardized procedures for state agencies to identify eligible cases and expunge records upon completion of sentencing or probation. This policy change shifts the burden from individuals to the state, ensuring eligible records are removed systematically and efficiently.
HB 3124 requires most criminal cases involving children under 17 to be handled in juvenile court instead of adult court. The bill only allows transferring a case to adult court if a judge certifies the child as an adult, typically for serious offenses. This directly affects minors accused of crimes in Missouri, keeping them in the juvenile system unless certification occurs. The bill modifies existing juvenile justice procedures to strengthen this default jurisdiction, without specifying certification criteria.
SJR 110 proposes amending Missouri's Constitution to allow criminal defendants to waive jury trials with the government's and court's consent, making the judge's ruling legally equivalent to a jury verdict. It repeals the current constitutional provision on jury trials and replaces it with new language governing jury sizes in civil cases and waiver procedures. This constitutional amendment will be submitted to Missouri voters in the 2026 election for approval or rejection. The bill directly affects criminal defendants who choose to forgo a jury trial.
