State v. Blackmon

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Blackmon

44 S.W.3d 443, 2001 Mo. App. LEXIS 702, 2001 WL 435271

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 1, 2001

DocketNo. WD 58050

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 44 S.W.3d 443 (State v. Blackmon) 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. Blackmon, 44 S.W.3d 443, 2001 Mo. App. LEXIS 702, 2001 WL 435271 (Mo. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

Michael Blackmon appeals his conviction of the Class D felony of violation of an order of protection, second offense, § 455.085.8, RSMo. He questions 1) the trial court’s discretion in allowing improper testimony of prior abuse as evidence of other crimes or bad acts; 2) the sufficiency of the information; and 3) the sufficiency of the State’s evidence. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, and find no error of law. A written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the applicable principles of law would have no prec-edential or jurisprudential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

Michael Blackmon appeals his conviction of the Class D felony of violation of an order of protection, second offense, § 455.085.8, RSMo. He questions 1) the trial court’s discretion in allowing improper testimony of prior abuse as evidence of other crimes or bad acts; 2) the sufficiency of the information; and 3) the sufficiency of the State’s evidence. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, and find no error of law. A written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the applicable principles of law would have no prec-edential or jurisprudential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

44 S.W.3d 443, 2001 Mo. App. LEXIS 702, 2001 WL 435271, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-blackmon-moctapp-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack