1. Where the trial court has erred and abused its discretion in
overruling defendant's motion to suppress his statements to
police, and in admitting that evidence at trial over counsel's
objection and by their own admission the officers did not stop
defendant on reasonable suspicion or probable cause that he had
committed a crime, and thus, defendant's statements under
interrogation were both the "fruit of the poisonous tree" and
the only evidence supporting a finding of second degree murder,
so that a manifest injustice resulted therefrom. Has prejudice
been shown?

2. Where the trial court has erred and abused its discretion in
overruling defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal at the
close of the evidence, and in pronouncing judgment and sentence
against him for second degree murder upon the jury's verdict,
because there was insufficient evidence to prove beyond a
reasonable doubt the essential element of the crime that
defendant believed Matthew Cook intended to kill Sean Crow nor
that it was a likely result of driving Cook to Advance,
Missouri. Has prejudice been shown?

3. Where defense counsel fails to investigate and call a
favorable witness to testify, as defendant's codefendant,
Matthew Cook had made statements during a police interview that
exonerated defendant of any knowledge and/or fault. Has
prejudice been shown?

where-the-trial-court-has-erred-and-abused-its-discretion