Court Opinion

ID: 9684618
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 14:03:59.322745+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:17:58.002849
License: Public Domain

FINCH, Judge,
dissenting.
I agree with much of the principal opinion. However, I disagree with the portion thereof which concludes that for certain trial errors this conviction should be reversed and remanded. Hence, I must respectfully dissent.
The principal opinion reverses and remands on the basis that certain evidence was improperly admitted in evidence and that the prosecutor made improper argument concerning such evidence in his closing argument to the jury. Defendant made no objection at trial to the introduction of the evidence in question and made no objection to counsel’s argument which the principal opinion holds to be reversible error. Instead, counsel for defendant argued this same evidence to the jury, pointing out portions thereof deemed to be favorable to defendant.
Defendant’s motion for new trial was silent on both of these questions. No objection to the admission of the evidence in question or the argument thereof to the jury is mentioned. It is first raised on appeal.
The principal opinion concludes that these matters are plain error for which a new trial should be granted. I disagree. These are not the type of trial errors for which this court has granted or should grant a new trial. The principal opinion relies on State v. Granberry, 491 S.W.2d 528 (Mo. banc 1973). However, Granberry did not *452reverse on the basis of plain error. The opinion therein contains no mention of Rule 27.20(c) nor does it hold that what occurred in that case constituted plain error.