(1)Where a defendant in a drug case argued that evidence about the possession of a gun would violate the protection against double jeopardy and constitute uncharged criminal conduct, the admission of the evidence did not implicate the double jeopardy protection and courts have broad discretion to admit such evidence, so the trial court did not abuse its discretion, and the defendant’s challenge to the admission of witness testimony from his first trial failed because the state made a good-faith effort to secure the witness, and the defendant was not prejudiced by the unavailability of the witness.
(2)Where a defendant in a drug case challenged the state’s closing argument and the trial court’s admonitions to defense counsel, the court’s directive to the defense counsel to sit down did not result in the denial of a fair trial to the defendant, and the court did not abuse its discretion in overruling objections to the prosecutor’s rebuttal argument, so the judgment is affirmed.
Judgment is affirmed.
State v. Mosely (MLW No. 74486/Case No. WD81972 – 31 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District, Newton, J.) Appealed from circuit court, Cole County, Green, J. (Andrew Sartorius, Jefferson City, for appellant) (Evan Buchheim, Jefferson City, for respondent).