Jordan Wood v. Criminal Records Repository [2023]

WD85024 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Jurisdiction from source

International Criminal Lawinternational-criminal-lawInternational Criminal LawCriminal recordsPrivacy law

Issue

What international criminal law issue, if any, is raised in this challenge to a criminal records repository?

Held

The source excerpt does not reveal the holding. This is a source-linked holding checkpoint; candidates should confirm the full judgment before relying on it.

Exam use

On an exam, if you encounter a case about criminal records, consider international privacy standards and treaties on information sharing. Use the source URL to verify the holding. In a problem question, if a client's criminal record is at issue in an international context, use this case to discuss domestic protections and compare with international norms.

Summary

Jordan Wood v. Criminal Records Repository is a 2023 Missouri Court of Appeals case. The source record provides a citation (WD85024) and docket number, decided May 23, 2023. The snippet indicates it involves a criminal records repository, possibly a challenge to the maintenance or dissemination of criminal records. No substantive facts or holdings are given. This record is a source-linked checkpoint; candidates should verify the full opinion to determine its relevance to international criminal law, possibly involving issues of privacy, data protection, or the recognition of foreign criminal records.

Facts

The source record does not provide facts. It identifies the case as Jordan Wood v. Criminal Records Repository, et al. The citation is WD85024, and the date is May 23, 2023. The snippet shows the case caption and filing date. Candidates must consult the full source to understand the nature of the dispute and any international law aspects.

Procedural History

The case is an appeal to the Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District. No further procedural history is available from the excerpt.

Issue

What international criminal law issue, if any, is raised in this challenge to a criminal records repository?

Held

The source excerpt does not reveal the holding. This is a source-linked holding checkpoint; candidates should confirm the full judgment before relying on it.

Ratio Decidendi

No legal rule can be derived from the excerpt. Candidates should review the full opinion for any rules related to international criminal law, such as the right to privacy under international human rights law or the exchange of criminal records under mutual legal assistance treaties.

Reasoning

The excerpt provides no reasoning. To use this record for exam preparation, students must access the full opinion via the source URL. The case may involve issues like the accuracy of criminal records or the right to expungement, which can intersect with international norms on rehabilitation and privacy. The record's inclusion suggests a potential connection, but verification is essential.

Plain-English Explanation

This is a Missouri case about someone suing a criminal records repository. The snippet doesn't say why. It might be about mistakes in a criminal record or privacy. To know if it's relevant to international criminal law, you need to read the full opinion. It could involve rules about sharing criminal records between countries.

Essay-Ready Explanation Generator

Version 1 of 4

Reference to Jordan Wood v. Criminal Records Repository (WD85024) strengthens a International Criminal Law answer because the case reflects the principle that No legal rule can be derived from the excerpt. Candidates should review the full opinion for any rules related to international criminal law, such as the right to privacy under international human rights law or the exchange of criminal records under mutual legal assistance treaties. Applied to a problem question, the case should be used after identifying the issue as What international criminal law issue, if any, is raised in this challenge to a criminal records repository? The stronger essay move is to connect the material facts to the court's holding, then explain whether the present facts support the same conclusion or justify distinguishing the authority.

Underlying Concepts

  • Criminal records
  • Privacy law

Precedents Applied

  • Source-check required

Later Treatment

  • Source-check required

Significance

The significance of this case for international criminal law is unclear from the excerpt. It may illustrate how domestic courts handle criminal record information that has cross-border implications. Students should treat it as a research exercise: locate the full opinion and analyze whether it addresses international standards for criminal record management.

Related Cases

No related cases listed.

Exam Tips

On an exam, if you encounter a case about criminal records, consider international privacy standards and treaties on information sharing. Use the source URL to verify the holding. In a problem question, if a client's criminal record is at issue in an international context, use this case to discuss domestic protections and compare with international norms.

Revision Checklist

  • Name the issue before discussing facts so the marker sees the legal question immediately.
  • State the holding in one sentence, then use the ratio to explain why the court reached that result.
  • Use the citation and jurisdiction to show why this authority matters for the problem you are answering.
  • Pair this case with one supporting or contrasting authority if the question tests limits, policy, or exceptions.

Problem Question Use

In a problem question involving the use of criminal records in an international criminal tribunal, use this case to discuss domestic limits on record dissemination. Verify the holding to see if the court addressed any international law arguments. Compare with the ICC's rules on evidence and privacy.

Common Pitfalls

  • Assuming a criminal records case has no international dimension
  • Ignoring the potential human rights implications of record-keeping

Sources