State v. Chapman

243 S.W.3d 491, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 47, 2008 WL 123978
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Chapman. Read the opinion of the Court — 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1078
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided January 15, 2008·No. No. ED 88377·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, James E. Chapman, appeals from his convictions of forcible sodomy, assault in the second degree, armed criminal action, kidnapping, and attempted forcible sodomy. Defendant contends the trial [492]*492court erred in allowing the State to present evidence of the victim’s condition after the alleged sexual offense.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude there is no error of law. 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. Chapman, 243 S.W.3d 491, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 47, 2008 WL 123978 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

243 S.W.3d 491 (State v. Chapman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.