State v. Long

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Long

386 S.W.3d 203, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1449, 2012 WL 5866489

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided November 20, 2012·No. No. ED 97191·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Arvel D. Long (Appellant) appeals from the trial court’s judgment of conviction entered upon a jury verdict finding him guilty of second-degree assault and armed criminal action. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing Appellant’s self-defense instructions nor commit plain error in failing to grant a new trial based on certain admitted testimony. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Criminal Procedure 80.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Arvel D. Long (Appellant) appeals from the trial court’s judgment of conviction entered upon a jury verdict finding him guilty of second-degree assault and armed criminal action. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing Appellant’s self-defense instructions nor commit plain error in failing to grant a new trial based on certain admitted testimony. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Criminal Procedure 80.25(b).

State v. Long, 386 S.W.3d 203, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1449, 2012 WL 5866489 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

386 S.W.3d 203 (State v. Long) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.