State v. Potts

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Potts

487 S.W.3d 514, 2016 WL 1642646, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 417

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 26, 2016

DocketWD 77191

StatusPublished

This text of 487 S.W.3d 514 (State v. Potts) 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. Potts, 487 S.W.3d 514, 2016 WL 1642646, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 417 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Robert Potts appeals his conviction of assault in the second degree, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion in excluding evidence of his victim’s prior municipal conviction for lying to a police officer. Potts did not offer evidence of the victim’s prior municipal conviction during trial, and he therefore failed to preserve the issue. Plain error review is unwarranted, and we accordingly affirm. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, an unpublished memorandum setting forth the reasons for this order has been provided to the parties. Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Robert Potts appeals his conviction of assault in the second degree, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion in excluding evidence of his victim’s prior municipal conviction for lying to a police officer. Potts did not offer evidence of the victim’s prior municipal conviction during trial, and he therefore failed to preserve the issue. Plain error review is unwarranted, and we accordingly affirm. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, an unpublished memorandum setting forth the reasons for this order has been provided to the parties. Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

487 S.W.3d 514, 2016 WL 1642646, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 417, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-potts-moctapp-2016.