State v. Gray

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Gray

41 S.W.3d 527, 2001 Mo. App. LEXIS 25, 2001 WL 15720

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 9, 2001

DocketNo. ED 77716

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 41 S.W.3d 527 (State v. Gray) 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. Gray, 41 S.W.3d 527, 2001 Mo. App. LEXIS 25, 2001 WL 15720 (Mo. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Ronnie L. Gray, appeals from a conviction for first-degree murder, Section 565.020.1 RSMo (1994);¹ first-degree robbery, Section 569.020; and two counts of armed criminal action, Section 571.015. Defendant was sentenced to life imprisonment without probation or parole for the murder charge, to a concurrent term of thirty years for the robbery charge, and to two consecutive terms of thirty years for the armed criminal action charges. Defendant alleges that the trial court erred in: (1) overruling his objection to the prosecutor’s use of peremptory challenges to remove four African American venirepersons; (2) permitting the State to call Láveme Hazlett’s (“Victim”) mother and sister to testify; and (3) admitting into evidence photographs of the Victim taken before and during the autopsy. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that: (1) the trial court’s denial of all of Defendant’s Batson challenges does not constitute clear error; and (2) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in overruling Defendant’s objections to the disputed testimony and photographs. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion [528]*528setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Criminal Procedure 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Ronnie L. Gray, appeals from a conviction for first-degree murder, Section 565.020.1 RSMo (1994);¹ first-degree robbery, Section 569.020; and two counts of armed criminal action, Section 571.015. Defendant was sentenced to life imprisonment without probation or parole for the murder charge, to a concurrent term of thirty years for the robbery charge, and to two consecutive terms of thirty years for the armed criminal action charges. Defendant alleges that the trial court erred in: (1) overruling his objection to the prosecutor’s use of peremptory challenges to remove four African American venirepersons; (2) permitting the State to call Láveme Hazlett’s (“Victim”) mother and sister to testify; and (3) admitting into evidence photographs of the Victim taken before and during the autopsy. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that: (1) the trial court’s denial of all of Defendant’s Batson challenges does not constitute clear error; and (2) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in overruling Defendant’s objections to the disputed testimony and photographs. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion [528]*528setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Criminal Procedure 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 S.W.3d 527, 2001 Mo. App. LEXIS 25, 2001 WL 15720, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-gray-moctapp-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack