State v. Lee

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Lee

356 S.W.3d 877, 2012 WL 122864, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 38

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 17, 2012

DocketED 95920

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 356 S.W.3d 877 (State v. Lee) 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. Lee, 356 S.W.3d 877, 2012 WL 122864, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 38 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Brandon Lee (Defendant) appeals the judgment upon his conviction by a jury of robbery in the first degree, Section 569.020, RSMo 2000, armed criminal action, Section 571.015, RSMo 2000, unlawful use of a weapon, Section 571.030, RSMo Cum.Supp.2008, and resisting arrest, Section 575.150, RSMo Cum.Supp.2008, for which he was sentenced to a total of twenty-five years’ imprisonment. Defendant contends the trial court erred and abused its discretion in overruling his motion for a mistrial after the jury heard evidence that he committed prior bad acts and uncharged crimes. Defendant also asserts the trial court plainly erred in submitting Instruction No. 11 to the jury because the verdict director for unlawful use of a weapon failed to specify a particular incident thus allowing the possibility that the jurors failed to find the same incident of unlawful use of a weapon unanimously.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgment 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.

Brandon Lee (Defendant) appeals the judgment upon his conviction by a jury of robbery in the first degree, Section 569.020, RSMo 2000, armed criminal action, Section 571.015, RSMo 2000, unlawful use of a weapon, Section 571.030, RSMo Cum.Supp.2008, and resisting arrest, Section 575.150, RSMo Cum.Supp.2008, for which he was sentenced to a total of twenty-five years’ imprisonment. Defendant contends the trial court erred and abused its discretion in overruling his motion for a mistrial after the jury heard evidence that he committed prior bad acts and uncharged crimes. Defendant also asserts the trial court plainly erred in submitting Instruction No. 11 to the jury because the verdict director for unlawful use of a weapon failed to specify a particular incident thus allowing the possibility that the jurors failed to find the same incident of unlawful use of a weapon unanimously.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

356 S.W.3d 877, 2012 WL 122864, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 38, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-lee-moctapp-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack