State v. Abbott

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Abbott

227 S.W.3d 531, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 950, 2007 WL 1814392

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 26, 2007

DocketED 88214

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 227 S.W.3d 531 (State v. Abbott) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Abbott, 227 S.W.3d 531, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 950, 2007 WL 1814392 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Jay W. Abbott (hereinafter, “Appellant”) appeals from the trial court’s judgment after a jury convicted him of one count of felony possession of a prohibited weapon in a county jail, Section 221.111 RSMo (2000). Appellant, a prior and persistent offender, was sentenced to fifteen years’ imprisonment to be served consecutively to any other prison term he was serving.

Appellant raises two points on appeal. First, Appellant argues the trial court plainly erred in allowing Appellant to represent himself at trial in that Appellant claims his waiver of representation was not voluntary, unequivocal, knowing, or intelligent. Second, Appellant claims the trial court erred when it faded to intervene and sua sponte offer curative instructions during portions of the State’s witnesses’ testimony which Appellant claims invaded the jury’s province to determine the ultimate issue at trial.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the transcript on appeal and find no error, plain or otherwise. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion, only for the use of the parties, setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Jay W. Abbott (hereinafter, “Appellant”) appeals from the trial court’s judgment after a jury convicted him of one count of felony possession of a prohibited weapon in a county jail, Section 221.111 RSMo (2000). Appellant, a prior and persistent offender, was sentenced to fifteen years’ imprisonment to be served consecutively to any other prison term he was serving.

Appellant raises two points on appeal. First, Appellant argues the trial court plainly erred in allowing Appellant to represent himself at trial in that Appellant claims his waiver of representation was not voluntary, unequivocal, knowing, or intelligent. Second, Appellant claims the trial court erred when it faded to intervene and sua sponte offer curative instructions during portions of the State’s witnesses’ testimony which Appellant claims invaded the jury’s province to determine the ultimate issue at trial.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the transcript on appeal and find no error, plain or otherwise. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion, only for the use of the parties, setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

227 S.W.3d 531, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 950, 2007 WL 1814392, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-abbott-moctapp-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack