State v. BARMETTLER

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. BARMETTLER

347 S.W.3d 171, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1121, 2011 WL 3806831

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 30, 2011

DocketED 94198

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 347 S.W.3d 171 (State v. BARMETTLER) 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. BARMETTLER, 347 S.W.3d 171, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1121, 2011 WL 3806831 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

William Barmettler (Defendant) appeals from the judgment upon his conviction by a jury of one count of statutory sodomy in the first degree, in violation of Section 566.062, RSMo 2000, 1 and one count of child molestation, in violation of Section 566.067, for which Defendant was sentenced as a prior offender and a persistent sexual offender to thirty-years’ imprisonment on the statutory sodomy count, without the possibility of probation or parole, and fifteen-years’ imprisonment on the *172 child molestation count, with the sentences to be served consecutively. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

1

. Unless otherwise indicated, all further references are to RSMo 2000.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

William Barmettler (Defendant) appeals from the judgment upon his conviction by a jury of one count of statutory sodomy in the first degree, in violation of Section 566.062, RSMo 2000, 1 and one count of child molestation, in violation of Section 566.067, for which Defendant was sentenced as a prior offender and a persistent sexual offender to thirty-years’ imprisonment on the statutory sodomy count, without the possibility of probation or parole, and fifteen-years’ imprisonment on the *172 child molestation count, with the sentences to be served consecutively. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

1

. Unless otherwise indicated, all further references are to RSMo 2000.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

347 S.W.3d 171, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1121, 2011 WL 3806831, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-barmettler-moctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack