State v. Baker

235 S.W.3d 592, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1420, 2007 WL 2993554
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Baker. Read the opinion of the Court — 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 1087
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 16, 2007·No. ED 88932·Published

Opinion

*593 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Cedric Baker appeals the judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of felony trafficking in the second degree. We find that the trial court did not plainly err in allowing testimony regarding a confidential informant’s out-of-court statements. We also find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in overruling Baker’s motion to suppress and allowing the State to admit the evidence of crack cocaine recovered in the search of Baker’s car. Finally, we find that the trial court did not plainly err in excluding, as hearsay, statements made by a woman claiming ownership of the drugs seized in Baker’s vehicle.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties with a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment under Rule 30.25(b).

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

State v. Baker, 235 S.W.3d 592, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1420, 2007 WL 2993554 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).

235 S.W.3d 592 (State v. Baker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cooper v. State
235 S.W.3d 592 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2007)