State v. Fifer

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Fifer

391 S.W.3d 497, 2013 WL 324264, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 121

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided January 29, 2013·No. No. WD 74682·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Jimmy Fifer (“Fifer”) appeals from the trial court’s judgment convicting him of deviate sexual assault. Fifer argues on appeal that the trial court erred in denying his motions for judgment of acquittal because the evidence presented at a bench trial was insufficient to support the conviction. Fifer claims that because the second amended information alleged that Fifer used forcible compulsion to commit deviate sexual assault, the State’s failure to present evidence of forcible compulsion required a judgment of acquittal. We affirm. Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Jimmy Fifer (“Fifer”) appeals from the trial court’s judgment convicting him of deviate sexual assault. Fifer argues on appeal that the trial court erred in denying his motions for judgment of acquittal because the evidence presented at a bench trial was insufficient to support the conviction. Fifer claims that because the second amended information alleged that Fifer used forcible compulsion to commit deviate sexual assault, the State’s failure to present evidence of forcible compulsion required a judgment of acquittal. We affirm. Rule 30.25(b).

State v. Fifer, 391 S.W.3d 497, 2013 WL 324264, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 121 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

391 S.W.3d 497 (State v. Fifer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.