State v. Barrett

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Barrett

173 S.W.3d 657, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1517, 2005 WL 2649258

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 18, 2005·No. ED 84964·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Timothy Barrett (Barrett) appeals the trial court’s judgment, which was entered after a jury found him guilty of Stealing a Controlled Substance. The trial court sentenced Barrett to six years’ imprisonment. There was sufficient evidence for a jury to find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Barrett stole morphine from his place of employment. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the Record on Appeal, and we find no error of law in this case. Thus, no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. The judgment is affirmed 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.

Timothy Barrett (Barrett) appeals the trial court’s judgment, which was entered after a jury found him guilty of Stealing a Controlled Substance. The trial court sentenced Barrett to six years’ imprisonment. There was sufficient evidence for a jury to find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Barrett stole morphine from his place of employment. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the Record on Appeal, and we find no error of law in this case. Thus, no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

State v. Barrett, 173 S.W.3d 657, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1517, 2005 WL 2649258 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

173 S.W.3d 657 (State v. Barrett) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related