State v. Akers

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Akers

501 S.W.3d 904, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1100, 2016 WL 6440403

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 1, 2016

DocketNo. ED 103662

StatusPublished

This text of 501 S.W.3d 904 (State v. Akers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Akers, 501 S.W.3d 904, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1100, 2016 WL 6440403 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Daniel Akers (“Defendant”) was convicted of robbery in the second degree, in violation of section 569.030.¹ Defendant was sentenced as a prior and persistent offender, pursuant to section 558.016, based on two prior felony convictions from Illinois and California. On appeal, Defendant argues the trial court erred in sentencing him as a prior and persistent offender because the State failed to establish that his prior felony conviction from California qualified as a felony in Missouri under section 568.016. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, and we find the trial court did not clearly err. An extended opinion would have no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Mo. R. Civ. P. 84.16(b) (2015).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Daniel Akers (“Defendant”) was convicted of robbery in the second degree, in violation of section 569.030.¹ Defendant was sentenced as a prior and persistent offender, pursuant to section 558.016, based on two prior felony convictions from Illinois and California. On appeal, Defendant argues the trial court erred in sentencing him as a prior and persistent offender because the State failed to establish that his prior felony conviction from California qualified as a felony in Missouri under section 568.016. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, and we find the trial court did not clearly err. An extended opinion would have no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Mo. R. Civ. P. 84.16(b) (2015).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

501 S.W.3d 904, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1100, 2016 WL 6440403, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-akers-moctapp-2016.