State v. Brotherton

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Brotherton

318 S.W.3d 309, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1043, 2010 WL 3230604

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 17, 2010

DocketED 93513

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 318 S.W.3d 309 (State v. Brotherton) 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. Brotherton, 318 S.W.3d 309, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1043, 2010 WL 3230604 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Tommy Wayne Brotherton (hereinafter, “Appellant”) appeals from the trial court’s judgment after a jury convicted him of one count of first degree statutory sodomy, Section 566.062 RSMo (2000) and one count of first degree child molestation, Section 566.067 RSMo (2000). Appellant was sentenced to a term of life imprisonment for the statutory sodomy conviction and fifteen years’ imprisonment for the child molestation conviction, to run concurrently. Appellant raises one point on appeal challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain his conviction for statutory sodomy.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the transcript on appeal. We find no error of law. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law 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. 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.

Tommy Wayne Brotherton (hereinafter, “Appellant”) appeals from the trial court’s judgment after a jury convicted him of one count of first degree statutory sodomy, Section 566.062 RSMo (2000) and one count of first degree child molestation, Section 566.067 RSMo (2000). Appellant was sentenced to a term of life imprisonment for the statutory sodomy conviction and fifteen years’ imprisonment for the child molestation conviction, to run concurrently. Appellant raises one point on appeal challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain his conviction for statutory sodomy.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the transcript on appeal. We find no error of law. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law 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. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

318 S.W.3d 309, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1043, 2010 WL 3230604, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-brotherton-moctapp-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack