State v. Crossland

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Crossland

235 S.W.3d 590, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1434, 2007 WL 2990927

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 16, 2007·No. ED 88664·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Ricardo Crossland (“Defendant”) appeals from the judgment of the trial court entered after a jury convicted him of one count of felony possession of a controlled substance (“Count I”) and one count of misdemeanor possession of a controlled substance (“Count II”), both counts in violation of section 195.202 RSMo 2000.

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 opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Ricardo Crossland (“Defendant”) appeals from the judgment of the trial court entered after a jury convicted him of one count of felony possession of a controlled substance (“Count I”) and one count of misdemeanor possession of a controlled substance (“Count II”), both counts in violation of section 195.202 RSMo 2000.

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 opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).

State v. Crossland, 235 S.W.3d 590, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1434, 2007 WL 2990927 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

235 S.W.3d 590 (State v. Crossland) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.