State v. Bass

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Bass

292 S.W.3d 930, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1389, 2009 WL 3086014

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Bass. Read the opinion of the Court — 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 495 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 29, 2009·No. No. ED 91898·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Michael Bass (Defendant) appeals from the trial court’s judgment and sentence after a jury convicted him of forcible rape, forcible sodomy, and first-degree assault. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the trial court did not err. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.

We affirm the judgment 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.

Michael Bass (Defendant) appeals from the trial court’s judgment and sentence after a jury convicted him of forcible rape, forcible sodomy, and first-degree assault. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the trial court did not err. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b)..

State v. Bass, 292 S.W.3d 930, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1389, 2009 WL 3086014 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

292 S.W.3d 930 (State v. Bass) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.