State v. Webb

343 S.W.3d 769, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 985, 2011 WL 3047493
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided July 26, 2011·No. WD 72215·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Jason Webb appeals from the trial court’s denial of his motion for new trial following his conviction for assault in the first degree, two counts of armed criminal action, and attempted robbery in the first degree. Webb alleges that the State failed *770 to correct Keith Nolen’s testimony regarding a plea agreement. Webb argues that Nolen’s testimony that his plea agreement was for a five year prison sentence was false because Nolen was able to argue for probation at sentencing. Webb contends that had the jury been informed that No-len could argue for probation at sentencing, the jury would have disbelieved No-len’s testimony implicating Webb in the crimes for which he was charged. We affirm. Rule 30.25(b).

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

State v. Webb, 343 S.W.3d 769, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 985, 2011 WL 3047493 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

343 S.W.3d 769 (State v. Webb) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Frazier
343 S.W.3d 769 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2011)