State v. Dent

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Dent

525 S.W.3d 219, 2017 WL 3597075, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 802

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 22, 2017

DocketED 104370

StatusPublished

This text of 525 S.W.3d 219 (State v. Dent) 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. Dent, 525 S.W.3d 219, 2017 WL 3597075, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 802 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Leland Dent (“Defendant”) was convicted by jury of one count of first-degree assault, in violation of Section 565.050, and one count of armed criminal action, in violation of Section 571.015. The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

The judgment of the trial court is not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order 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.

Leland Dent (“Defendant”) was convicted by jury of one count of first-degree assault, in violation of Section 565.050, and one count of armed criminal action, in violation of Section 571.015. The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

The judgment of the trial court is not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

525 S.W.3d 219, 2017 WL 3597075, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 802, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-dent-moctapp-2017.