State v. Clayton

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Clayton

517 S.W.3d 677, 2017 WL 1883828, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 398

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 9, 2017

DocketNo. ED 104335

StatusPublished

This text of 517 S.W.3d 677 (State v. Clayton) 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. Clayton, 517 S.W.3d 677, 2017 WL 1883828, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 398 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Brenda Clayton (“Appellant”) appeals from the trial court’s judgment convicting her of possession of a controlled substance, a class A misdemeanor in violation of Section 195.202, and possession of drug paraphernalia, a class A misdemeanor in violation of Section 195.233. Appellant was sentenced to ten days in jail.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

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

Brenda Clayton (“Appellant”) appeals from the trial court’s judgment convicting her of possession of a controlled substance, a class A misdemeanor in violation of Section 195.202, and possession of drug paraphernalia, a class A misdemeanor in violation of Section 195.233. Appellant was sentenced to ten days in jail.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

517 S.W.3d 677, 2017 WL 1883828, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 398, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-clayton-moctapp-2017.