Opinion ID: 6108499
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Request to Hold a Hearing on Objections to the Master's Report

Text: Healea next argues this Court should issue a writ of mandamus ordering the trial court to hold a hearing on his objections to the master's report prior to adopting the report. The trial court, however, did consider Healea's objections to the master's report at two hearings. The master's report was filed December 29, 2016. Healea filed his objections to the master's report January 26, 2017, and a hearing was conducted February 9. This hearing concluded with the trial court adopting the recommendation of the master, which rejected Healea's request to dismiss the case. The trial court entered an order suppressing certain evidence 3 and set a new hearing date for all pending motions. Healea filed a motion to reconsider the decision to adopt the recommendation. Another hearing was held March 2 to address Healea's motion to reconsider, as well as a motion to suppress evidence obtained by use of allegedly invalid search warrants and a motion to close the courtroom. This hearing concluded with the trial court ordering the circuit clerk to keep the master's report sealed in its entirety until March 10, giving Healea eight days to seek a writ from a higher court. 4 In addition,  the March 2 order overruled Healea's motion to reconsider the trial court's order adopting the master's report but noted the trial court would reconsider that order again if [Healea] provides a written request of specific evidence desired to be excluded. As to any additional issues, Healea does not indicate what he wanted the trial court to consider and why those additional issues should have been resolved in his favor. His failure to fully set forth his argument leaves this Court with nothing to review. See State v. Nunley , 341 S.W.3d 611 , 623 (Mo. banc 2011).