Springfield woman arrested, found driving stolen car in Cedar County
CEDAR COUNTY, Mo. — A Springfield woman was arrested for multiple charges after she was found driving a stolen car.
According to online court records, Brianna Howser, 19, faces charges of tampering with a motor vehicle, unlawful possession of drug paraphernalia and operating a vehicle on a highway without a valid license.
According to the probable cause statement, on May 10, around 6 p.m., the Cedar County Missouri Sheriff's Office (CCMSO) was dispatched to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Second Swimming Beach for a report of a stolen vehicle.
A deputy was able to locate the stolen vehicle in the Bearcreek area and conducted a traffic stop. The driver was identified as Howser.
During the arrest, when Howser stepped out of the vehicle, a glass pipe with white and black residue was allegedly found under her leg. Investigators also found a scale with white crystalline residue, and several small baggies were found in Howser's bag.
During a post-Miranda conversation, Howser admitted she did not have the owner's permission to drive the vehicle, and admitted the glass pipe was hers.
Howser was transported to the Cedar County Detention Center with a bond set to $10,000 cash only.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Motion hearing in Lily Peters murder case set for Monday
CHIPPEWA FALLS — When will the trial for Carson Peters-Berger take place, and where? Will the case be moved to a different county in the state, or will a jury be brought to Chippewa County? Those are the questions that will likely be resolved Monday at a motion hearing in the murder case. The hearing is expected to last the entire day. Peters-Berger, who turned 17 in March, is accused of killing and then sexually assaulting his 10-year-old cousin, Lily Peters, in April 2022. Peters-Berger is charged in Chippewa County Court as an adult with first-degree intentional homicide and two counts of sexual assault. He was 14 at the time. The motion hearing is set to begin at 8:15 a.m. Monday before Judge Steve Gibbs and could take the entire day. Because a trial is likely to go a week or more, and because all the witnesses and experts will need to clear their schedule, it is expected Gibbs will set a trial for some point in 2026. In May, Gibbs issued an order that precludes all media from live-streaming the proceedings, in any way, of all pretrial evidentiary hearings. Media also will be barred from recording any live testimony, and 'all media may not directly quote the testimony of the witnesses,' but may 'summarize the content of the testimony.' An offender will face contempt proceedings. A flurry of motions and letters have been filed with the court this week in advance of the hearing. Defense attorney Michael Cohen filed a motion to suppress Peters-Berger's interview with police, contending that Peters-Berger's 'statements were taken in violation of his Miranda rights, and the second claim being that the statements were involuntary.' Cohen contends that Peters-Berger believed he was not free to leave the interview. However, District Attorney Wade Newell countered that 'the only issue is whether the defendant was in custody,' and Newell contends that Peters-Berger was not formally arrested at the time of his questioning. 'No arrest-like restraints were placed on the defendant,' Newell wrote in a new court filing. 'He was not handcuffed; no weapons were drawn; the defendant was not frisked. He was simply shown the way to the interview room.' Newell added: 'The defendant was told that he was not being forced to be there, and could leave whenever he needed to. In fact, to make it clear to him, the investigator point blank told him that he was not under arrest.' Newell also stressed that all comments made by Peters-Berger to police were voluntary. Gibbs granted a request to seal the transcript of the interview recording with police and a flash drive that contains video of the interview. Cohen also has requested the trial be moved out of Chippewa County, citing news reports in the Leader-Telegram, WEAU and WQOW, among others. 'A jury in this matter will obviously be compromised, if kept within the county of Chippewa, of a significant portion of people that have friends, neighbors, co-workers, family members, etc., that have strong concerns and emotions and feelings and opinions about this case,' Cohen wrote. 'It is unfathomable and unrealistic to think that jurors can just set aside all of their own emotions, anxieties, concerns about being known within the public for being on the jury if the jury were to find in contrast to what public opinion thinks the verdict should be.' Newell also filed a new letter, arguing against a motion to have the trial moved to a different county. 'While the defense is correct that the defendant need not prove actual prejudice exists, vague allegations of improper and prejudicial publicity and inconclusive evidence thereof do not make a showing that the community was so infected with passion and prejudice as to make it likely that a fair trial could not be had,' Newell wrote. 'All we have at this point is speculation as to what effects the pretrial publicity or memorial activity will have on any potential jurors. The state still contends the best way to determine if the community has been so infected with passion and prejudice, is with a well-written jury questionnaire that will determine individual juror biases or prejudices. This will ensure that an impartial jury is impaneled.' Cohen countered with a new letter, saying he will be asking for a pretrial questionnaire, but that is 'separate and distinct' from any request for a change of venue. As the Leader-Telegram reported earlier this year, only two cases — both murders — have been moved out of Chippewa County in the past 25 years. Because of all the motions that will be discussed, Cohen has requested the hearing be split into two different days. Cohen had previously argued that the case should not be in adult court because Peters-Berger is a juvenile. However, Judge Gibbs ruled on Jan. 22, 2024, that the case would remain in adult court, rejecting the defense's petition to have it moved to a juvenile proceeding. The Court of Appeals later agreed with Gibbs. Gibbs has since unsealed the name of the suspect. Peters-Berger has been held in the Northwest Regional Juvenile Detention Center in Eau Claire on a $1 million cash bond since his arrest. Lily Peters was killed on April 24, 2022, in Chippewa Falls. Her body was discovered the next morning. When interviewed by investigators, Peters-Berger told police he punched Lily in the stomach, struck her on the head three times with a heavy stick, then strangled her until she was dead. He then had sex with her body. He went home and put his dirty clothes in the laundry, but later returned to the scene, dragged her body a few feet, and covered her body with leaves.
New York Post
2 days ago
- New York Post
400-pound monster alligator named Pepe ‘detained' for ‘being a dinosaur without proper papers' in NC
The scales of justice came for Pepe. Cops detained – and rescued – a monster 10-foot alligator they nicknamed Pepe the Gator sunbathing on a busy road in North Carolina and 'charged' him on suspicion of being a 'dinosaur.' 'Witnesses say he was just chilling and snapping, clearly ignoring the 'no loitering or lounging on roadways' sign,' the Onslow County Sheriff's Office wrote in a playful press release last week. 'Pepe has been cited for Suspicion of Being a Dinosaur Without Proper Papers, Public Loitering with Intent to Sunbathe, and Obstructing Traffic.' Advertisement 3 Deputies and a wildlife officer straddle Pepe the Gator, who was playfully charged with being a dinosaur without proper papers as he sunbathed on a North Carolina highway last month. Onslow County Sheriff's Office The responding deputies and officers from the NC Wildlife Resources Commission who got the call on May 25 managed to safely remove Pepe, but not before posing for pictures where they straddle him like rodeo riders. 'He was 10 feet long, 400 pounds. He was an absolute monster,' Trevor Dunnell, spokesman for the Onslow County Sheriff's Office told the Post Thursday. Advertisement 'They did a fantastic job of wrangling him.' To indicate the scale of the gator, Dunnell pointed out how, in the picture, even with three grown men on top of him, Pepe's still not covered. 'The picture really doesn't do it justice, I mean 10 feet … 10 feet is a basketball goal, that is a massive creature,' he said. Although 10 feet seems big, it's nothing compared to the largest gator on record – 14 feet and 3 and a half inches. Advertisement Deputies and wildlife officials used a towel to cover Pepe's eyes — eye contact is what triggers the animal's notorious death roll, Dunnell explained — and electrical tape to seal his mouth shut. 'It was definitely some MacGyver stuff they had to use,' he said. 'He may not have a good time during the removal, but he was playfully enough about it later to understand that, 'Hey, man, you gotta do what you gotta do.'' 3 Deputies and a wildlife officer in North Carolina successfully relocated Pepe the Gator. Onslow County Sheriff's Office Dunnell said the office received blowback from people online wishing the cops had just left Pepe alone. but Dunnell was quick to point out that leaving the reptile on the side of the road could have posed a hazard not only to residents but also to the gator. Advertisement 'You never know what can happen when kids are running around,' he said. 'And the gator could wind up in the middle of the road. It could hurt drivers but it could hurt him, too.' Dunnell said he hopes to see body camera footage of Pepe's apprehension. The two deputies and the wildlife official in the picture are happy to be riding him, Dunnell said, adding that if authorities encounter another Pepe, they'll know who to call. 3 The sheriff's office dropped all charges against Pepe the Gator, who was playfully suspected of being a dinosaur without his proper papers, after he was returned to his natural habitat. Onslow County Sheriff's Office 'But some deputies were absolutely not fine,' he said. 'When they got back, they were saying, 'You're not going to catch me on that thing. I'm not going to go anywhere near it!'' Pepe was far from home, and Dunnell suspects that it was a hot day and he was looking for a good spot to bask. 'How far he wandered is anybody's guess,' he said. 'It must've been several miles at least.' After further investigation, Dunnell said, they declined to charge Pepe. Instead, they drove him to a boat ramp at nearby Camp Geiger, a satellite facility of Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune. Advertisement 'I think we've touched base with the gator and let him know we dropped the charges,' he joked. 'Pepe's back to his normal routine, he's hanging out near the beach and lounging in his natural habitat, hunting for his food and looking for a girlfriend.'
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Missouri's Historic Abortion Victory Is Crumbling Before Our Eyes
Just a few months ago, Missouri voters approved a ballot measure to protect abortion rights. That measure, known as Amendment 3, added a 'reproductive freedom' amendment to the state constitution. It was crafted to offer stronger legal protections for abortion than existed under Roe v. Wade, according to campaigners, and to end the state's near-total abortion ban, which had been triggered by the Supreme Court's 2022 decision to overturn Roe. Those who voted for it believed that the amendment would allow them to override such past anti-abortion court rulings and to block anti-abortion lawmakers' future efforts—in essence, to reclaim their own rights and political voice. But as of May 27, by way of a two-page order from the state's Supreme Court, the abortion ban voters had been told they defeated was back. The ruling came as a 'surprise' to pro-choice and anti-abortion groups alike, the Missouri Independent reported this week. With it, the Supreme Court of Missouri has effectively allowed the state to enforce a raft of anti-abortion laws that had been challenged by two Planned Parenthood affiliates, which argued that such laws now violated the state constitution, thanks to Amendment 3. After last week's ruling, Planned Parenthood health centers in the state—Missouri's only abortion clinics—canceled upcoming appointments and advised patients that they could instead go to neighboring Kansas or Illinois, where abortion is legal. For now, those patients, and any Missourian who needs an abortion, have found themselves right back where they would have been had Amendment 3 never been on the ballot. The sudden loss of abortion access is an inarguable blow for Missouri's reproductive rights movement. But it's also something more troubling: a sign of flaws in the post-Roe strategy chosen by large national reproductive rights groups like Planned Parenthood and state chapters and affiliates of such groups, including the ACLU and Reproductive Freedom for All (formerly NARAL). For these groups, abortion rights ballot measures have been seen as a path forward in a hostile legal environment, a way to restore access without relying on the courts. Campaigns would go direct to the people, giving energized supporters a tangible goal to work toward, along with some optimism, amid an otherwise crushing assault on reproductive freedom and bodily autonomy. The speed with which Missouri's ballot measure has gone from being a historic victory to yet another legal battle reveals that such election night wins may prove to be far more qualified and complicated to hold onto than campaigners had hoped. For some advocates in Missouri who had worked on Amendment 3, however, there was nothing all that surprising in the state Supreme Court's ruling. They saw it as a reality check. 'There is no way to responsibly sugarcoat what's playing out in the state,' the What's Next for Missouri coalition told me in a statement from the group. The coalition was founded by longtime Missouri reproductive justice advocates, as well as former staff of Planned Parenthood affiliates in Missouri who quit over their concerns about the ballot measure. 'Amendment 3 was a limited and symbolic win,' the coalition said. 'In reality, it has failed to protect pregnant people's bodily autonomy. Inaccessible abortion is just the tip of the iceberg.' Voters in Missouri may have declared that abortion was their constitutional right, but abortion was not going to return overnight to Missouri. In November, state Attorney General Andrew Bailey offered his legal opinion on which anti-abortion laws might still be enforceable. After stating that Amendment 3 'just barely' won by a 'tight margin,' he opined that 'the result may be very different if a future constitutional amendment is put up for a vote,' and detailed circumstances in which he believed some of the laws could still be enforced. In other words, he was not going to accept that Amendment 3 automatically invalidated state anti-abortion laws—and to be fair, the Amendment 3 campaign seems to have anticipated just such a reaction. Not long after the election, the two Planned Parenthood affiliates that have health centers in Missouri challenged many of those laws as 'presumptively unconstitutional,' citing Amendment 3. Their petition, filed in the circuit court of Jackson County by Planned Parenthood Great Plains and Planned Parenthood Great Rivers-Missouri, also requested that the court temporarily block such laws while the case played out. That included the total abortion ban triggered after Roe, as well as laws meant to restrict abortion access even if it were not technically banned, such as mandatory waiting periods and mandatory ultrasounds. In a pair of rulings in December and February, Judge Jerri Zhang granted the affiliates' request for a temporary injunction on most of those laws, after which Planned Parenthood clinics in Missouri began to offer abortion again, with significant limits: only procedural abortion up to 12 or 13 weeks, no medication abortion, in just three clinics across the entire state, operating at limited capacity. Other restrictions remained, including some that were not part of Planned Parenthood's challenge. Mandatory parental involvement laws were later challenged by the practical abortion support organization Right By You, in April. There were also restrictions that Amendment 3 did not touch: The ballot measure allows for abortion to be banned past fetal viability, the legal line after which a fetus is thought to be able to survive independently. This means that people having later abortions were left out of the promises of Amendment 3 from the start. Missouri Attorney General Bailey appealed Judge Zhang's decision, seeking to block abortion in the state during the court challenge—an appeal enabled by a new law giving the state attorney such power to sue to halt injunctions, signed just days before. Meanwhile, the Missouri General Assembly voted to put a new abortion ban on the ballot, an effort to overturn Amendment 3. The constitutional right protecting abortion that voters believed they had succeeded in installing was being rapidly undermined across multiple fronts—by the state attorney general, in the courts, and in the legislature. This legal undermining depends in part on voters not knowing that it's even happening. The proposed anti-abortion ballot measure language did not refer to Amendment 3, nor to banning abortion, hiding its ban behind claims of ensuring women's 'safety during abortions.' For good measure, it added a ban on gender-affirming care for minors—care that is currently banned in the state. Democrats in the state legislature had tried to block the anti-abortion ballot measure proposal from advancing, but Republicans broke their filibuster with 'a rare procedural maneuver to shut down debate and force a vote on a measure that would repeal Amendment 3,' as St. Louis Public Radio reported. Amendment 3 campaign leaders forcefully denounced both the new ballot measure and the legislature's underhanded attempt to reverse the will of Missouri voters. 'This deceptive amendment is a trojan horse to reinstate Missouri's total abortion ban,' Tori Schafer, director of policy and campaigns at the ACLU of Missouri, said in a statement. At protests on the steps of the state Capitol in Jefferson City, Amendment 3 supporters were now fighting to hang onto their victory, as they have had to many times this session. 'This past November, more than 1.5 million Missourians made their voices heard at the ballot box,' Mallory Schwarz, executive director of Abortion Action Missouri, said. 'Missourians are used to fighting back and are prepared to keep showing up.' Two weeks later, abortion access in the state would be all but nonexistent again, after Missouri Supreme Court Chief Justice Mary Russell ordered Judge Zhang to vacate her temporary injunction and to reevaluate the Planned Parenthood affiliates' request, this time using a stricter standard. The ACLU of Missouri, which is co-counsel in the legal challenge, told The New Republic that it had 'immediately' responded to the order by sending correspondence to the court, 'highlighting that our arguments met this standard.' Tom Bastian, ACLU of Missouri director of communications, added that while the group 'can't predict when the court will act, we anticipate new orders … granting the preliminary injunctions blocking the ban and restrictions, once again allowing Missourians access to abortion care.' For now, then, those Missourians will be doing what they did before election night, before Dobbs: going out of state or self-managing their abortion with pills. In this, the reality for abortion in Missouri looks a lot like it did back when the near-total ban passed. The difference is that now more than $30 million has been spent on a ballot measure meant to reverse that ban. As the legal scholar Mary Ziegler pointed out this week, it is possible that Missourians' abortion rights will prevail, that Planned Parenthood will get its injunction, or even that the new anti-abortion ballot measure may fail. However, as she wrote, 'what is happening in Missouri is still a sign about the limits of ballot measures.' Advocates in other states should be asking: What is such a 'win' worth? The legal battle over Amendment 3 is nothing new, as Planned Parenthood's initial filing in this legal challenge acknowledged. 'The State of Missouri has spent decades attempting to eliminate or severely reduce abortion access,' its petition stated. 'This means that Plaintiffs have spent decades challenging these laws.' The lengths that Missouri lawmakers have been willing to go since the election, unfortunately, indicate that this is not a fair fight in fair courts. 'It's time for simple honesty,' What's Next said to me this week. People will have unreliable and irregular access to abortion 'until we shift power away from fascist politicians.' The reality is that this fight for the constitutional right to abortion was playing out at the same time that our constitutional rights were being ignored and undermined on a regular basis. Before we fundraise millions more dollars to replicate the fight in other states—fundraising that will be justified as 'restoring' access to abortion by making it a right—we might consider other, more immediate ways to give people what they need. That money might be better spent on paying for actual abortions, as abortion funds across the country do, helping people in the many states with abortion bans to access care. In a legal system that cannot be counted upon, there may be no more direct way of supporting a fundamental right.
