State v. Crawford

144 S.W.3d 301, 2003 Mo. App. LEXIS 1652, 2003 WL 22399739
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Crawford. Read the opinion of the Court — 2000 Mo. App. LEXIS 1807
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 21, 2003·No. No. ED 82031·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Michael Crawford (“Defendant”) appeals from a judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of first degree murder, armed criminal action, and first degree assault. He alleges three points of error. His first two points address the pretrial lineup in which he was identified as the assailant. Specifically, in his first point, he alleges that the State violated his constitutional rights by conducting a lineup in the absence of defense counsel. In his second point, Defendant argues that the trial court erred in admitting the identification testimony of witnesses in that the identification procedures were unduly suggestive and created a substantial risk of misidenti-fication. In his final point, he asserts that the trial court erred in failing to question each juror individually regarding an allegedly prejudicial newspaper article that was published the evening before the jurors began their second day of deliberations. We find no merit in Defendant’s arguments and affirm.

The judgment entered upon the verdict is affirmed pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

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

State v. Crawford, 144 S.W.3d 301, 2003 Mo. App. LEXIS 1652, 2003 WL 22399739 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003).

144 S.W.3d 301 (State v. Crawford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.