Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Criminal Law : Cross Examination – Inconsistent Points – Consecutive Sentences

Stephanie Maniscalco//July 21, 2016//

Criminal Law : Cross Examination – Inconsistent Points – Consecutive Sentences

Stephanie Maniscalco//July 21, 2016//

Listen to this article

Where a defendant in a statutory rape case claimed that a trial court abused its discretion in overruling his counsel’s objection to the state’s of the defendant as to why the victim would lie, the arguments in defendant’s point on appeal were not the same as the objection lodged at trial, and the defense counsel did not object to the question until after the defendant answered, and no motion to strike was made, so the point is waived, and even though the prosecutor made an incorrect statement at sentencing, the record showed that the sentences were based on valid considerations, so the defendant did not show that the trial court plainly erred in imposing .

Judgment is affirmed.

State v. Elam (MLW No. 69375/Case No. SD33905 – 9 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Francis Jr., J.) Appealed from circuit court, Phelps County, Beger, J. (Daniel Neal McPherson, Jefferson City, for respondent) (Ellen H. Flottman, Columbia, for appellant).

Read the full text of this opinion. (PDF)

 


Latest Opinion Digests

See all digests

Top stories

See more news