State v. Estes

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Estes

567 S.W.3d 696

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 13, 2019·No. No. ED 106333·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Keith Estes appeals from the judgment entered on his convictions after a jury trial for felony possession of heroin and misdemeanor possession of paraphernalia with intent to use. There was no error in the exclusion of evidence, nor in the prosecutor's closing argument. We affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. 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

PER CURIAM.

Keith Estes appeals from the judgment entered on his convictions after a jury trial for felony possession of heroin and misdemeanor possession of paraphernalia with intent to use. There was no error in the exclusion of evidence, nor in the prosecutor's closing argument. We affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. 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).

State v. Estes, 567 S.W.3d 696 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

567 S.W.3d 696 (State v. Estes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.