State v. Anderson

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Anderson

64 S.W.3d 850, 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 19, 2002 WL 15598

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 8, 2002

DocketNo. ED 77691

StatusPublished

This text of 64 S.W.3d 850 (State v. Anderson) 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. Anderson, 64 S.W.3d 850, 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 19, 2002 WL 15598 (Mo. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Andre Anderson, appeals from his conviction for felony stealing in violation of section 570.030, RSMo Cum. Supp.1997. He appeals, contending the trial court misapplied the best evidence rule. Having reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, we conclude the trial court did not err. An extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum opinion setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Andre Anderson, appeals from his conviction for felony stealing in violation of section 570.030, RSMo Cum. Supp.1997. He appeals, contending the trial court misapplied the best evidence rule. Having reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, we conclude the trial court did not err. An extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum opinion setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

64 S.W.3d 850, 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 19, 2002 WL 15598, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-anderson-moctapp-2002.