State v. Shelton

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Shelton

544 S.W.2d 599, 1976 Mo. App. LEXIS 2671

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 23, 1976

DocketNo. 37225

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 544 S.W.2d 599 (State v. Shelton) 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. Shelton, 544 S.W.2d 599, 1976 Mo. App. LEXIS 2671 (Mo. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

CLEMENS, Judge.

Defendant was tried for and convicted of assault with intent to kill without malice (§ 559.190, RSMo. 1969), sentenced to three months in jail and fined $500. On appeal defendant raises only one issue concerning the admission of evidence.

[600]*600Defendant contends the trial court erred in admitting certain out-of-court statements as declarations against interest because there was no showing the testimony of the declarant was unavailable. This is not mentioned in defendant’s motion for new trial and therefore is not properly preserved for review. State v. Amerson, 518 S.W.2d 29[1] (Mo.1975) and State v. Gomillia, 529 S.W.2d 892[1] (Mo.App.1975).

Furthermore, plain error Rule 27.20(c) will not be applied since evidence of defendant’s guilt is overwhelming. State v. Hurtt, 509 S.W.2d 14[3] (Mo.1974); State v. White, 529 S.W.2d 22[3] (Mo.App.1975).

We have concluded that an extended opinion in this case would have no prece-dential value and affirm the judgment in accordance with Rule 84.16.

WEIER, P. J., and DOWD, J., concur.

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