State v. Campbell

370 S.W.3d 923, 2012 WL 2107920, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 785
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Campbell. Read the opinion of the Court — 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1226
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 12, 2012·No. No. ED 96378·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Terry Campbell (Appellant) appeals from the trial court’s judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of first-degree burglary. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that there was sufficient evidence to support Appellant’s conviction, and therefore the trial court did not err in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal and motion for new trial. We also conclude that the trial court did not err in overruling defense counsel’s Bat-son 1 challenge to one of the State’s per[924]*924emptory strikes. An extended opinion would have no precedential 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

State v. Campbell, 370 S.W.3d 923, 2012 WL 2107920, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 785 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

370 S.W.3d 923 (State v. Campbell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Batson v. Kentucky
476 U.S. 79 (Supreme Court, 1986)