State v. Dillard

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Dillard

207 S.W.3d 689, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1832, 2006 WL 3486824

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 5, 2006·No. No. WD 65929·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Ronald Dillard challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction for driving while his license was suspended, a violation of Section 302.321, RSMo. [690]*6902000. Upon review of the briefs and the record, we find no error and affirm the conviction. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a published opinion; however, we have provided the parties with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision.

AFFIRMED. Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Ronald Dillard challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction for driving while his license was suspended, a violation of Section 302.321, RSMo. [690]*6902000. Upon review of the briefs and the record, we find no error and affirm the conviction. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a published opinion; however, we have provided the parties with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision.

AFFIRMED. Rule 30.25(b).

State v. Dillard, 207 S.W.3d 689, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1832, 2006 WL 3486824 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

207 S.W.3d 689 (State v. Dillard) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.