State v. De La Hunt

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. De La Hunt

398 S.W.3d 483, 2013 WL 216382, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 73

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided January 22, 2013·No. No. ED 98120·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Matthew De La Hunt appeals from the judgment upon his conviction by a jury of one count of attempted enticement of a child, in violation of Section 566.151, RSMo Cum.Supp.2006.¹ We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this ease would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

Footnotes

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Matthew De La Hunt appeals from the judgment upon his conviction by a jury of one count of attempted enticement of a child, in violation of Section 566.151, RSMo Cum.Supp.2006.¹ We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this ease would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

Footnotes

State v. De La Hunt, 398 S.W.3d 483, 2013 WL 216382, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 73 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

398 S.W.3d 483 (State v. De La Hunt) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.