Court Opinion

ID: 9768359
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 05:58:36.287496+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:30:39.798353
License: Public Domain

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
PER CURIAM.
Appellant in his motion for rehearing contends that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on first degree murder as a lesser included offense. There was no objection at trial to the failure to so instruct the jury, and appellant did not raise the point in his motion for new trial. It is raised here for the first time in appellant’s reply brief, but it attempts to raise a new matter rather than reply to matters raised in the state’s brief. Such is impermissible. State v. Brown, 502 S.W.2d 295, 306 (Mo.1973), cert. denied, 416 U.S. 973, 94 S.Ct. 1999, 40 L.Ed.2d 562 (1974).
Appellant argues that we should review the point for plain error. Rule 29.-12(b). After careful consideration we conclude that there has been no “manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice,” id., that would necessitate reversal. The trial court instructed the jury on second degree murder and manslaughter, and the jury thus had the opportunity to convict appellant of a lesser offense. See Beck v. Alabama, 447 U.S. 625, 100 S.Ct. 2382, 65 L.Ed.2d 392 (1980). Moreover, the evidence in this case would not support an instruction on first degree (felony) murder because none of the five enumerated felonies, § 565.003, RSMo 1978, was present. Due process therefore is not abridged. Hopper v. Evans, -U.S. -, 102 S.Ct. 2049, 72 L.Ed.2d 367 (1982).
The motion for rehearing is overruled.