State v. Lasley

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Lasley

531 S.W.3d 129

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 31, 2017

DocketWD 79392

StatusPublished

This text of 531 S.W.3d 129 (State v. Lasley) 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. Lasley, 531 S.W.3d 129 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Bryant Lasley was charged in the Circuit Court of Jackson County with second-degree (felony) murder, first-degree robbery, and two counts of armed criminal action, in connection with the murder of Mark Shears in Kansas City in October 2012. Lasley was convicted of all four charges following ■ a jury trial, at which he testified in his own defense. Las-ley appeals. He argues: (1) that the circuit court erroneously failed to suppress a pretrial statement he made to police officers; (2) that he should have been permitted to question a prosecution witness concerning the average sentence for the reduced charges the witness faced as a result of a plea agreement; and (3) that the circuit court should have taken action sua sponte after the prosecution made reference to Lasley’s prior felony convictions during closing argument, We affirm. Because a published opinion would have no prece-dential value, we have provided -the parties with an unpublished memorandum- setting forth the reasons for this order. Rule 30.25(b). ■ ;-

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Bryant Lasley was charged in the Circuit Court of Jackson County with second-degree (felony) murder, first-degree robbery, and two counts of armed criminal action, in connection with the murder of Mark Shears in Kansas City in October 2012. Lasley was convicted of all four charges following ■ a jury trial, at which he testified in his own defense. Las-ley appeals. He argues: (1) that the circuit court erroneously failed to suppress a pretrial statement he made to police officers; (2) that he should have been permitted to question a prosecution witness concerning the average sentence for the reduced charges the witness faced as a result of a plea agreement; and (3) that the circuit court should have taken action sua sponte after the prosecution made reference to Lasley’s prior felony convictions during closing argument, We affirm. Because a published opinion would have no prece-dential value, we have provided -the parties with an unpublished memorandum- setting forth the reasons for this order. Rule 30.25(b). ■ ;-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

531 S.W.3d 129, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-lasley-moctapp-2017.