Lambert v. State (Majority, with Dissenting)
Annotate this CaseAfter a jury trial, Appellant was convicted of one count of felon in possession of a firearm. On appeal, Appellant argued that the circuit court erred in denying his motion for directed verdict because the State failed to present sufficient evidence that he possessed the firearm and that the circuit court erred in denying his motion for new trial because the State withheld exculpatory evidence from the defense. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) substantial evidence supported Appellant’s conviction for felon in possession of a firearm; and (2) the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in denying Appellant’s motion for new trial.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.