State v. Ater

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Ater

351 S.W.3d 246, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1419, 2011 WL 5064303

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 25, 2011

DocketED 94320

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 351 S.W.3d 246 (State v. Ater) 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. Ater, 351 S.W.3d 246, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1419, 2011 WL 5064303 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

David A. Ater appeals from the trial court’s judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of second-degree murder and kidnapping. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court committed no error, plain or otherwise. Rule 30.20; 1 State v. Washington, 260 S.W.3d 875, 879 (Mo.App. E.D.2008). An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. 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 Rule 30.25(b).

1

. All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P.2010, unless otherwise indicated.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

David A. Ater appeals from the trial court’s judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of second-degree murder and kidnapping. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court committed no error, plain or otherwise. Rule 30.20; 1 State v. Washington, 260 S.W.3d 875, 879 (Mo.App. E.D.2008). An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. 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 Rule 30.25(b).

1

. All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P.2010, unless otherwise indicated.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

351 S.W.3d 246, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1419, 2011 WL 5064303, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-ater-moctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack