State v. Cooper

415 S.W.3d 138, 2013 WL 6254333, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 1406
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided November 26, 2013·No. No. ED 98993·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Darryl Cooper appeals from the judgment entered upon a jury’s verdict convicting him of one count of burglary in the first degree, section 569.160, RSMo (2000). He contends the trial court erred: (1) in denying his motion for judgment of acquit[139] tal because the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction, and (2) in overruling his objection to testimony offered by a lay witness because it was speculative, and therefore inadmissible. We find no error and affirm.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, which sets forth the reasons for this order.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

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

State v. Cooper, 415 S.W.3d 138, 2013 WL 6254333, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 1406 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).

415 S.W.3d 138 (State v. Cooper) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.