State v. Brinson

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Brinson

285 S.W.3d 835, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 965, 2009 WL 1851060

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 30, 2009

DocketWD 67863

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 285 S.W.3d 835 (State v. Brinson) 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. Brinson, 285 S.W.3d 835, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 965, 2009 WL 1851060 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

John L. Brinson appeals the circuit court’s judgment convicting him of first-degree murder in violation of § 565.020.1, RSMo 2000. On appeal, he raises two Points. He first claims that the circuit court erred in failing to grant his motion for a mistrial based on an unsolicited outburst during trial by the victim’s mother, a prosecution witness. In his second point, *836 Brinson argues that he was entitled to a judgment of acquittal because the State failed to prove that he deliberated before murdering the victim. The judgment is affirmed. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum setting forth the reasons for this order has been provided to the parties. Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

John L. Brinson appeals the circuit court’s judgment convicting him of first-degree murder in violation of § 565.020.1, RSMo 2000. On appeal, he raises two Points. He first claims that the circuit court erred in failing to grant his motion for a mistrial based on an unsolicited outburst during trial by the victim’s mother, a prosecution witness. In his second point, *836 Brinson argues that he was entitled to a judgment of acquittal because the State failed to prove that he deliberated before murdering the victim. The judgment is affirmed. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum setting forth the reasons for this order has been provided to the parties. Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

285 S.W.3d 835, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 965, 2009 WL 1851060, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-brinson-moctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack