State v. Newell

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Newell

258 S.W.3d 825, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 610, 2008 WL 1944561

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 6, 2008

DocketWD 66973

StatusPublished

This text of 258 S.W.3d 825 (State v. Newell) 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. Newell, 258 S.W.3d 825, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 610, 2008 WL 1944561 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant Larry Newell stood trial for three counts of second-degree domestic assault, one count of forcible rape, and one count of attempted forcible sodomy. The jury convicted Newell on two of the assault counts but could not reach a decision on the remaining charges. Newell received a sentence of two twelve-year terms in prison, which are to run concurrently. He appeals, asserting error in the admission of expert testimony regarding the behavior of women in abusive relationships. New-ell’s three points on appeal contest admissibility on the grounds that the testimony (1) was irrelevant to trial issues, (2) contained subjects improper for expert testimony, and (3) constituted an improper admission of evidence relating to prior bad acts. As Newell’s first point was the only one properly preserved for appeal, this court reviews that point for prejudicial error and the second and third points for plain error. After a review of the record and the arguments in this case, this court is convinced that no reversible error occurred. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. A memorandum explaining the court’s reasoning has been provided to the parties.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant Larry Newell stood trial for three counts of second-degree domestic assault, one count of forcible rape, and one count of attempted forcible sodomy. The jury convicted Newell on two of the assault counts but could not reach a decision on the remaining charges. Newell received a sentence of two twelve-year terms in prison, which are to run concurrently. He appeals, asserting error in the admission of expert testimony regarding the behavior of women in abusive relationships. New-ell’s three points on appeal contest admissibility on the grounds that the testimony (1) was irrelevant to trial issues, (2) contained subjects improper for expert testimony, and (3) constituted an improper admission of evidence relating to prior bad acts. As Newell’s first point was the only one properly preserved for appeal, this court reviews that point for prejudicial error and the second and third points for plain error. After a review of the record and the arguments in this case, this court is convinced that no reversible error occurred. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. A memorandum explaining the court’s reasoning has been provided to the parties.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 S.W.3d 825, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 610, 2008 WL 1944561, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-newell-moctapp-2008.