State v. Bennett

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Bennett

298 S.W.3d 586, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1738, 2009 WL 4639577

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Bennett. Read the opinion of the Court — 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 561 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 8, 2009·No. ED 92431·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Floyd R. Bennett appeals from the trial court’s judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of forcible sodomy, first-degree robbery, first-degree burglary, and three counts of armed criminal action. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that no reversible error occurred. 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 Missouri Rule of Criminal Procedure 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Floyd R. Bennett appeals from the trial court’s judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of forcible sodomy, first-degree robbery, first-degree burglary, and three counts of armed criminal action. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that no reversible error occurred. 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 Missouri Rule of Criminal Procedure 30.25(b).

State v. Bennett, 298 S.W.3d 586, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1738, 2009 WL 4639577 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

298 S.W.3d 586 (State v. Bennett) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.