State v. Ellison

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Ellison

575 S.W.3d 496

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 13, 2019

DocketNo. ED 106179

StatusPublished

This text of 575 S.W.3d 496 (State v. Ellison) 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. Ellison, 575 S.W.3d 496 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Jevon Ellison ("Appellant") appeals his conviction, following jury trial, of two counts of assault in the first-degree, in violation of Section 565.050 RSMo, and two counts of armed criminal action, in violation of Section 571.015. Appellant was sentenced to a total of 18 years on each count of first-degree assault, and fifteen years for each count of armed criminal action, with the sentences to run concurrently.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

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

PER CURIAM

Jevon Ellison ("Appellant") appeals his conviction, following jury trial, of two counts of assault in the first-degree, in violation of Section 565.050 RSMo, and two counts of armed criminal action, in violation of Section 571.015. Appellant was sentenced to a total of 18 years on each count of first-degree assault, and fifteen years for each count of armed criminal action, with the sentences to run concurrently.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

575 S.W.3d 496, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-ellison-moctapp-2019.