State v. Whitmore

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Whitmore

340 S.W.3d 605, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 510, 2011 WL 1531968

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 12, 2011

DocketED 95214

StatusPublished

This text of 340 S.W.3d 605 (State v. Whitmore) 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. Whitmore, 340 S.W.3d 605, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 510, 2011 WL 1531968 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Steven Whitmore (“Defendant”) appeals from the judgment upon his conviction by a jury of involuntary manslaughter in the first degree, Section 565.046.1, RSMo 2000, and armed criminal action, Section 571.015, RSMo 2000. Defendant asserts the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of involuntary manslaughter in the second degree.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. We find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Steven Whitmore (“Defendant”) appeals from the judgment upon his conviction by a jury of involuntary manslaughter in the first degree, Section 565.046.1, RSMo 2000, and armed criminal action, Section 571.015, RSMo 2000. Defendant asserts the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of involuntary manslaughter in the second degree.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. We find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

340 S.W.3d 605, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 510, 2011 WL 1531968, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-whitmore-moctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack