(1)Where a defendant argued that a detective’s statement about getting the defendant’s side of the story, which was made prior to the Miranda warnings, made his relinquishment of the right to remain silent involuntary, the facts showed that the defendant understood the warnings and made an uncoerced statement, so the trial court did not err in denying the motion to suppress.
(2)Where a defendant in a first-degree murder trial argued that the trial court plainly erred in allowing the prosecutor to discuss the facts of reported cases during the state’s closing argument, the trial was a bench trial, and the defendant did not support his argument that is was error for a trial judge to listen to an argument based on what the lawyer believed the law to be.
Judgment is affirmed.
State v. Duke (MLW No. 66308/Case No. SD32459 – 12 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Sheffield, J.) Appealed from circuit court, Greene County, Mountjoy, J. (Amy Marie Bartholow, Columbia, for appellant) (Richard Anthony Starnes, Jefferson City, for respondent).