State v. Gray

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Gray

544 S.W.3d 329

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 24, 2018

DocketWD 80629

StatusPublished

This text of 544 S.W.3d 329 (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, 544 S.W.3d 329 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Bryan Gray appeals, following a jury trial, his convictions of two counts of first-degree statutory sodomy (§ 566.062) and one count of first-degree child molestation (§ 566.067), for which he was sentenced, as a prior offender, to concurrent terms of eighteen, eighteen, and ten years' imprisonment, respectively. Gray raises a single claim on appeal; he argues that the trial court plainly erred in failing to sua sponte intervene in closing argument to prevent the State from personally attacking defense counsel. But because the State's arguments, which addressed Victim's credibility in the face of defense counsel's aggressive tactics, were permissible, the trial court committed no error, plain or otherwise, and we affirm. Rule 30.25(b).

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

Per Curiam:

Bryan Gray appeals, following a jury trial, his convictions of two counts of first-degree statutory sodomy (§ 566.062) and one count of first-degree child molestation (§ 566.067), for which he was sentenced, as a prior offender, to concurrent terms of eighteen, eighteen, and ten years' imprisonment, respectively. Gray raises a single claim on appeal; he argues that the trial court plainly erred in failing to sua sponte intervene in closing argument to prevent the State from personally attacking defense counsel. But because the State's arguments, which addressed Victim's credibility in the face of defense counsel's aggressive tactics, were permissible, the trial court committed no error, plain or otherwise, and we affirm. Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

544 S.W.3d 329, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-gray-moctapp-2018.