State v. Ford

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Ford

323 S.W.3d 85, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1405, 2010 WL 4075442

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 19, 2010·No. ED 93493·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Melvin L. Ford appeals from the trial court’s judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of second-degree domestic assault, third-degree domestic assault, and violation of an order of protection. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court committed no plain error. Rule 30.20; 1 State v. Washington, 260 S.W.3d 875, 879 (Mo.App. E.D.2008). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We af *86 firm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

1

. All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P.2008, unless otherwise indicated.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Melvin L. Ford appeals from the trial court’s judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of second-degree domestic assault, third-degree domestic assault, and violation of an order of protection. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court committed no plain error. Rule 30.20; 1 State v. Washington, 260 S.W.3d 875, 879 (Mo.App. E.D.2008). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We af *86 firm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

1

. All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P.2008, unless otherwise indicated.

State v. Ford, 323 S.W.3d 85, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1405, 2010 WL 4075442 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

323 S.W.3d 85 (State v. Ford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related