State v. Cook

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Cook

291 S.W.3d 375, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1221, 2009 WL 2748145

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 1, 2009

DocketED 91954

StatusPublished

This text of 291 S.W.3d 375 (State v. Cook) 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. Cook, 291 S.W.3d 375, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1221, 2009 WL 2748145 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Kenneth Cook (“Defendant”) appeals from the judgment upon his conviction by a jury of three counts of statutory rape in the first degree, Section 566.032, RSMo 2000, and one count of statutory sodomy in the first degree, Section 566.062, RSMo 2000, for which Defendant was sentenced to concurrent terms of twelve years’ imprisonment for each count. Defendant contends the trial court (1) erred in overruling his objection to the redaction of the victim’s videotaped testimony because the evidence that the victim fought a girl at school, resulting in her transfer to another school at the time of the allegations, showed the victim’s state of mind and mo *376 tivation for making the allegations, and (2) abused its discretion in prohibiting Defendant from asking the victim about her drug use throughout her life because the evidence of her “intoxication condition affected her perception of the incidents and believability.”

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Kenneth Cook (“Defendant”) appeals from the judgment upon his conviction by a jury of three counts of statutory rape in the first degree, Section 566.032, RSMo 2000, and one count of statutory sodomy in the first degree, Section 566.062, RSMo 2000, for which Defendant was sentenced to concurrent terms of twelve years’ imprisonment for each count. Defendant contends the trial court (1) erred in overruling his objection to the redaction of the victim’s videotaped testimony because the evidence that the victim fought a girl at school, resulting in her transfer to another school at the time of the allegations, showed the victim’s state of mind and mo *376 tivation for making the allegations, and (2) abused its discretion in prohibiting Defendant from asking the victim about her drug use throughout her life because the evidence of her “intoxication condition affected her perception of the incidents and believability.”

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

291 S.W.3d 375, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1221, 2009 WL 2748145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-cook-moctapp-2009.