State v. Washington

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Washington

459 S.W.3d 917, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 494, 2015 WL 2089744

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Washington. Read the opinion of the Court — 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 126 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided May 5, 2015·No. WD 76599·Published

Opinion

Order

Per Curiam:

Robert Washington appeals his conviction for first-degree murder. Washington’s sole claim of error, challenging a statement made by the prosecutor during closing argument, is not preserved due to Washington’s failure to object when the challenged statement was made at trial. Nevertheless, Washington contends that the trial court plainly erred in allowing the prosecutor to make an acquittal-first argument in violation of Washington’s Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights.' Because we find no manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. Rule 30.25(b).

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

Order

Per Curiam:

Robert Washington appeals his conviction for first-degree murder. Washington’s sole claim of error, challenging a statement made by the prosecutor during closing argument, is not preserved due to Washington’s failure to object when the challenged statement was made at trial. Nevertheless, Washington contends that the trial court plainly erred in allowing the prosecutor to make an acquittal-first argument in violation of Washington’s Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights.' Because we find no manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. Rule 30.25(b).

State v. Washington, 459 S.W.3d 917, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 494, 2015 WL 2089744 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

459 S.W.3d 917 (State v. Washington) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.