Charles Joseph Vogel
Judge Vogel no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Vogel decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
He gives substantial-evidence review real force and treats supported agency findings and reasonable inferences as conclusive.
“We hold here that the findings of the Secretary and the reasonable inferences drawn therefrom are amply supported by substantial evidence and are, therefore, conclusive.”
He will excuse further exhaustion when another procedural round would serve no practical purpose and the claim is ready for federal merits review.
“In our opinion, it would be a useless procedure to force the appellant here to comply with the provisions of the Supreme Court of Missouri Rule 27.26.”
He requires administrative findings to be supported by the record rather than sustained through generalized suspicion.
“In all, none of the violations found by the Board is sustainable on this record.”
Procedural preferences
He applies plain-error review cautiously when trial counsel did not preserve an objection.
“The plain error rule should be applied with caution and should be invoked only to avoid a clear miscarriage of justice.”
He reads jury instructions as a whole and does not isolate a single phrase from the complete charge.
“Instructions must be viewed in their entirety rather than in isolated segments.”
He distinguishes errors from reversible errors by asking whether the challenged ruling caused actual prejudice in the full evidentiary record.
“If error be committed, it must of necessity be prejudicial before the actions of the trial court will be reversed.”
Cautions
A party who fails to object to a confession ordinarily cannot demand a separate voluntariness hearing without exceptional circumstances.
“By inference we conclude that a defendant, failing to object, is entitled to no hearing on voluntariness, absent the exceptional circumstances suggested in United States v. Taylor”
An open and appreciated danger will defeat a products-liability claim when the machine provided a safe way to perform the task.
“Under the controlling law of the State of Missouri plaintiff may not recover against the manufacturer.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“We accordingly modify the judgment by showing the set-off figure to be correct at $10,885.94, and as so modified the judgment is in all things affirmed.”
“This case is reversed and remanded to the District Court for a determination on the merits.”
“Reversed as to Count II, affirmed as to Count I.”
“The decision and order of the District Court are in all respects affirmed.”
“No reasonable doubt can be found herein, and accordingly this case is affirmed.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Not applicable to this circuit-court record.
A historical record
Judge Vogel no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.