State v. Earl

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Earl

490 S.W.3d 797, 2016 WL 3070142, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 538

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 31, 2016

DocketNo. ED 102712

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 490 S.W.3d 797 (State v. Earl) 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. Earl, 490 S.W.3d 797, 2016 WL 3070142, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 538 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Steven Earl (“Earl”) appeals from the trial court’s judgment, entered after a jury trial, convicting him of one count of first-degree child molestation and three counts of third-degree assault. The trial court sentenced Earl to fifteen years’ imprisonment as a prior and persistent offender. On appeal, Earl first argues that the trial court abused its discretion by allowing five witnesses to testify about Victim’s hearsay accounts of the alleged crime, and by admitting Victim’s videotaped hearsay statements into evidence, under Section 491.075. Earl also argues that the trial court clearly erred by overruling his Bat-son objection during trial because the State’s purported race-neutral reasons for striking an African-American juror'were pretext for racial discrimination.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court 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

Steven Earl (“Earl”) appeals from the trial court’s judgment, entered after a jury trial, convicting him of one count of first-degree child molestation and three counts of third-degree assault. The trial court sentenced Earl to fifteen years’ imprisonment as a prior and persistent offender. On appeal, Earl first argues that the trial court abused its discretion by allowing five witnesses to testify about Victim’s hearsay accounts of the alleged crime, and by admitting Victim’s videotaped hearsay statements into evidence, under Section 491.075. Earl also argues that the trial court clearly erred by overruling his Bat-son objection during trial because the State’s purported race-neutral reasons for striking an African-American juror'were pretext for racial discrimination.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

490 S.W.3d 797, 2016 WL 3070142, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 538, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-earl-moctapp-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack