State v. Burton

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Burton

289 S.W.3d 600, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 423, 2009 WL 909707

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 7, 2009

DocketWD 69086

StatusPublished

This text of 289 S.W.3d 600 (State v. Burton) 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. Burton, 289 S.W.3d 600, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 423, 2009 WL 909707 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

OrDER

PER CURIAM.

Dominic V. Burton, tried by the court following waiver of a jury trial, was convicted of first-degree murder, pursuant to section 565.020, 1 and armed criminal action, pursuant to section 571.015. The trial court sentenced him to concurrent terms of life without parole and fifteen years, respectively. On appeal, Burton asserts that the trial court erred in finding him guilty of first-degree murder because: (1) the trial court misapplied the law of diminished capacity; and (2) the evidence was insufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that he knowingly caused the death of Jennifer Burton after cool reflection. Affirmed, Rule 30.25(b).

1

. All statutory references are to RSMo 2000 unless otherwise specified.

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

OrDER

PER CURIAM.

Dominic V. Burton, tried by the court following waiver of a jury trial, was convicted of first-degree murder, pursuant to section 565.020, 1 and armed criminal action, pursuant to section 571.015. The trial court sentenced him to concurrent terms of life without parole and fifteen years, respectively. On appeal, Burton asserts that the trial court erred in finding him guilty of first-degree murder because: (1) the trial court misapplied the law of diminished capacity; and (2) the evidence was insufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that he knowingly caused the death of Jennifer Burton after cool reflection. Affirmed, Rule 30.25(b).

1

. All statutory references are to RSMo 2000 unless otherwise specified.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

289 S.W.3d 600, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 423, 2009 WL 909707, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-burton-moctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack