Legal Opinion

STATE OF MISSOURI, Plaintiff-Respondent v. JARROD P. SIROIS

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided February 10, 2015No. SD33264Published

1Opinion of the CourtNancy Steffen Rahmeyer, J.

After being convicted of murder in the first degree and armed criminal action, Jarrod P. Sirois (“Appellant”) brings one point challenging the trial court’s limitations on his counsel’s questions during voir dire. Because the trial court is vested with wide discretion in the conduct of voir dire, we find no error and affirm.

“A trial judge is in the best position to determine whether a disclosure of facts on voir dire sufficiently assures the defendant of an impartial jury without permitting a prejudicial presentation of the evidence.” State v. Lutz, 334 S.W.3d 157, 163 (Mo.App.S.D.2011)…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. GranberrySupreme Court of Missouri · 1972
  2. State v. LutzMissouri Court of Appeals · 2011

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API