State v. Armstrong

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Armstrong

838 S.W.2d 521, 1992 Mo. App. LEXIS 1594, 1992 WL 292480

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Armstrong. Read the opinion of the Court — 1993 Mo. App. LEXIS 1374 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 20, 1992·No. No. 60924·Published

Opinion

[522]*522ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant was convicted by a jury of forcible rape and forcible sodomy, and sentenced by the court as a persistent misdemeanor offender to concurrent prison terms of twenty-five years. We affirm. We have reviewed the record and find the claims of error are without merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

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

[522]*522ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant was convicted by a jury of forcible rape and forcible sodomy, and sentenced by the court as a persistent misdemeanor offender to concurrent prison terms of twenty-five years. We affirm. We have reviewed the record and find the claims of error are without merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

State v. Armstrong, 838 S.W.2d 521, 1992 Mo. App. LEXIS 1594, 1992 WL 292480 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

838 S.W.2d 521 (State v. Armstrong) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.