[Nameplate] Fair ~ 49°F  
High: 54°F ~ Low: 45°F
Wednesday, Jan. 28, 2015

150th District re-election postponed

Friday, December 14, 2012

(Photo)
The re-election for the 150th District between State Representative Kent Hampton of Malden, Mo., and Tom Todd, of Campbell, Mo., has been postponed, according to representatives from the Dunklin County Prosecuting Attorney's Office and Russell Oliver, attorney for Representative Hampton.

The election was scheduled to take place on Tuesday, Dec. 18, and only in the Campbell II and Campbell Rural Precincts.

According to Oliver, Prosecuting Attorney Sokoloff has now filed a motion to re-open the evidence because County Clerk Carol Hinsley has discovered problems in the Cottonhill Rural Precinct near Malden, Mo. Todd and his attorney, Daren Todd, of Malden, have also filed a petition for a writ of prohibition with the Missouri Supreme Court which is currently pending.

"I'm surprised that we're still in the middle of it," Oliver said. He added that Todd certainly has the legal right to pursue the different avenues that are open to him in this case.

The new election that was to be held but is now cancelled, was in reference to a petition that was filed on Wednesday, Nov. 14, by Dunklin County Prosecuting Attorney Stephen P. Sokoloff on behalf of County Clerk Carol Hinesly pertaining to a new election in the 150th District of the Missouri House of Representatives.

Sokoloff's petition alleged that there were sufficient mis-votes in the General Election, held Nov. 6, to call into question the validity of the results.

According to a written statement by the prosecutor, from a preliminary canvass performed by Hinesly, it appears that a number of voters who live in the 152nd District were given ballots to vote in the 150th District and a number of voters in the 150th District were given ballots for the 152th District.

As noted in a previous article, "Because of changes in the district boundaries, there were many voters in the county whose district changed," Sokoloff wrote in his release. "They all continued to vote at the same precincts as they had previously, however. It appears that the registration books may have incorrectly identified which district they lived in, resulting in incorrect ballots being distributed."

Sokoloff also said in a previous article that the petition was filed in accordance with Missouri Revised Statutes Section 115.600, which provides that in the event the Election Authority is convinced that "errors of omission or commission occurred on the part of the election authority, election judges, or any election personnel in the conduct of an election, may petition the Circuit Court for a recount or a new election and the court is authorized to order a new election if the evidence provided demonstrates that the irregularities were sufficient to cast doubt on the outcome of the election."

According to the uncertified preliminary election results, Hampton narrowly defeated Todd 50.5 percent to 49.5 percent.


Comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please Login or Create an account first, and then you will be able to flag a comment as objectionable. Please also note that those who post comments on dddnews.com may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.

Todd lost his appeal to the State Supreme Court.

http://pro.kzim-am.tritonflex.com/common...

-- Posted by cottonman on Fri, Dec 14, 2012, at 1:27 PM

That's not true cottonman. The Supreme Court preliminarily granted Todd's writ. However, around the same time, Judge Winchester had granted Sokloff's motion to re-open the hearing. By doing that, Winchester set aside his previous ruling, meaning the Supreme Court had nothing to rule on. The simple fact that the Supreme Court preliminarily granted the writ means they definitely saw merit in the case.

-- Posted by bootheelmomma on Fri, Dec 14, 2012, at 5:32 PM

Regardless of who won or lost the election, if ballots were wrong then it needs to be re-done.

-- Posted by blondegirl on Mon, Dec 17, 2012, at 10:29 AM


Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration. If you already have an account on this site, enter your username and password below. Otherwise, click here to register.

Username:

Password:  (Forgot your password?)

Your comments:
Please be respectful of others and try to stay on topic.