State v. Burnett

254 S.W.3d 259, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 749, 2008 WL 2237145
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedJune 3, 2008
DocketWD 67551
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 254 S.W.3d 259 (State v. Burnett) 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. Burnett, 254 S.W.3d 259, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 749, 2008 WL 2237145 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

A jury convicted Derrick Lamont Burnett of burglary in the first degree and attempted stealing. He now appeals asserting two claims of error. First, he claims that there was insufficient evidence to sustain the conviction because he may *260 have been working with an accomplice and was not charged under a theory of accomplice liability. Second, he claims that the trial court abused its discretion in forbidding an investigator to testify on grounds that Burnett’s trial counsel failed to disclose the investigator to the prosecution prior to trial. Based on our review of the record, we affirm the convictions.

Rule 30.25(b).

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

Related

Beggs v. State
254 S.W.3d 259 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
254 S.W.3d 259, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 749, 2008 WL 2237145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-burnett-moctapp-2008.