Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Foster

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided January 31, 1984No. 12868Published

1DissentMaus, Presiding Judge

I must respectfully dissent. I do not believe the record supports the determination of plain error upon which the majority opinion rests.

Error not properly preserved will not be considered ‘plain error’ unless there is a finding that ‘manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice has resulted therefrom,’ Rule 30.20; and instructional error will not be considered plain error unless it is found that the trial court has so misdirected or failed to instruct the jury upon the law as to produce or cause manifest injustice or a miscarriage of justice. State v. Ealey, 624 S.W.2d 465, 467 (Mo.App.1981).

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State v. MillerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1980
  2. State v. WellsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1979
  3. State v. WoodfinMissouri Court of Appeals · 1977
  4. State v. EaleyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1981
  5. State v. StearnsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1981

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API