State v. Graves

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Graves

236 S.W.3d 650, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1160, 2007 WL 2363589

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 21, 2007

DocketED 88665

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 236 S.W.3d 650 (State v. Graves) 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. Graves, 236 S.W.3d 650, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1160, 2007 WL 2363589 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Jeronnia Graves appeals the judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of robbery in the second degree. In particular, Graves challenges the trial court’s decision to allow the pretrial and in-court identifications of Graves by the victim, Lawrence Ward. Graves argues that the identifications were unreliable and therefore their admission violated Graves’s rights to due process and a fair trial. We find that because there was no evidence of improper or unduly suggestive police procedures, the trial court did not plainly err in allowing the identifications. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We affirm the judgment under Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Jeronnia Graves appeals the judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of robbery in the second degree. In particular, Graves challenges the trial court’s decision to allow the pretrial and in-court identifications of Graves by the victim, Lawrence Ward. Graves argues that the identifications were unreliable and therefore their admission violated Graves’s rights to due process and a fair trial. We find that because there was no evidence of improper or unduly suggestive police procedures, the trial court did not plainly err in allowing the identifications. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We affirm the judgment under Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

236 S.W.3d 650, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1160, 2007 WL 2363589, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-graves-moctapp-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack