State v. Parrent

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Parrent

399 S.W.3d 498, 2013 WL 2221484, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 602

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided May 21, 2013·No. No. ED 98613·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Jason Parrent (“Defendant”) appeals from the judgment of the trial court entered after a jury convicted him of voluntary manslaughter. Defendant contends that the trial court erred by admitting statements that he made after he invoked his right to remain silent.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose [499] would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court 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.

Jason Parrent (“Defendant”) appeals from the judgment of the trial court entered after a jury convicted him of voluntary manslaughter. Defendant contends that the trial court erred by admitting statements that he made after he invoked his right to remain silent.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose [499] would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).

State v. Parrent, 399 S.W.3d 498, 2013 WL 2221484, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 602 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

399 S.W.3d 498 (State v. Parrent) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.