State v. Griffith
State v. Griffith
237 S.W.3d 242; 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1474; 2007 WL 3144976
(South Western Reporter, Third Series)
Cases that cite this one
1 later published case cites this decision.
- State v. Griffith (Mo. Ct. App. 2013)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Order
Brock Griffith appeals his convictions of burglary, stealing, and tampering with a motor vehicle. Griffith alleges that the trial court plainly erred by not sua sponte prohibiting the prosecuting attorney from arguing facts not in evidence during closing arguments. Because no facial plain error is evident, we do not grant plain error review.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.