State v. DERECSKEY

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. DERECSKEY

298 S.W.3d 595, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1703, 2009 WL 4640557

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 8, 2009·No. ED 92233·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Richard Derecskey (Defendant), appeals from the judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of the Class A misdemeanor of stalking, in violation of Section 565.225 1 . The trial court sentenced Defendant as a prior and persistent offender to a term of one year at the Medium Security Institution. Finding no error, we affirm.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for the order affirming the judgment. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

1

. All statutory references are to RSMo.2007 Cum.Supp., unless otherwise indicated.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Richard Derecskey (Defendant), appeals from the judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of the Class A misdemeanor of stalking, in violation of Section 565.225 1 . The trial court sentenced Defendant as a prior and persistent offender to a term of one year at the Medium Security Institution. Finding no error, we affirm.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for the order affirming the judgment. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

1

. All statutory references are to RSMo.2007 Cum.Supp., unless otherwise indicated.

State v. DERECSKEY, 298 S.W.3d 595, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1703, 2009 WL 4640557 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

298 S.W.3d 595 (State v. DERECSKEY) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related