State v. Campbell

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Campbell

539 S.W.3d 120

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 6, 2018

DocketNo. ED 105046

StatusPublished

This text of 539 S.W.3d 120 (State v. Campbell) 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. Campbell, 539 S.W.3d 120 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Tamell Campbell appeals from the judgment entered on his convictions after a jury trial for murder in the first degree and armed criminal action. The trial court did not clearly err in sustaining the State's challenge to the defendant's peremptory strike under Batson v. Kentucky , 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986). We affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, *121setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

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

PER CURIAM.

Tamell Campbell appeals from the judgment entered on his convictions after a jury trial for murder in the first degree and armed criminal action. The trial court did not clearly err in sustaining the State's challenge to the defendant's peremptory strike under Batson v. Kentucky , 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986). We affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, *121setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

539 S.W.3d 120, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-campbell-moctapp-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack