State v. Edwards

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Edwards

964 S.W.2d 557, 1998 Mo. App. LEXIS 677, 1998 WL 156506

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 7, 1998

DocketNo. 72604

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 964 S.W.2d 557 (State v. Edwards) 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. Edwards, 964 S.W.2d 557, 1998 Mo. App. LEXIS 677, 1998 WL 156506 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Arnell Edwards, Defendant, appeals from the judgment entered after a jury convicted him of possession of a controlled substance in violation of section 195.292, RSMo 1994, and unlawful use of a weapon in violation of section 571.030, RSMP Cum.Supp.1997. Defendant appeals only his conviction for unlawful use of a weapon, claiming insufficient evidence.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find sufficient evidence from which a reasonable juror might have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Grim, 854 S.W.2d 403, 405 (Mo. Banec 1993). A written opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose and we affirm by summary order pursuant to Rule30.25(b). We have, however, prepared a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Arnell Edwards, Defendant, appeals from the judgment entered after a jury convicted him of possession of a controlled substance in violation of section 195.292, RSMo 1994, and unlawful use of a weapon in violation of section 571.030, RSMP Cum.Supp.1997. Defendant appeals only his conviction for unlawful use of a weapon, claiming insufficient evidence.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find sufficient evidence from which a reasonable juror might have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Grim, 854 S.W.2d 403, 405 (Mo. Banec 1993). A written opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose and we affirm by summary order pursuant to Rule30.25(b). We have, however, prepared a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

964 S.W.2d 557, 1998 Mo. App. LEXIS 677, 1998 WL 156506, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-edwards-moctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack