State v. Scott

896 S.W.2d 755, 1995 Mo. App. LEXIS 794, 1995 WL 238684
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Scott. Read the opinion of the Court — 1996 Mo. App. LEXIS 1090
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 25, 1995·No. No. 66554·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from the judgment entered pursuant to his conviction by a jury of second-degree robbery in violation of § 569.030 RSMo.1994, for which he was sentenced as a prior and persistent offender to fifteen years imprisonment. In his sole point on appeal, defendant contends the trial court erred in permitting the state to impeach his testimony with his post-arrest silence.

Defendant acknowledges that he did not properly preserve this issue for appellate review. He therefore requests review under the plain error standard of Rule 30.20. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find that no manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice resulted from the admission of this evidence. An opinion would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).

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

State v. Scott, 896 S.W.2d 755, 1995 Mo. App. LEXIS 794, 1995 WL 238684 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995).

896 S.W.2d 755 (State v. Scott) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.