State v. Gee

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Gee

228 S.W.3d 628, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1064, 2007 WL 2088582

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 24, 2007

DocketWD 66754

StatusPublished

This text of 228 S.W.3d 628 (State v. Gee) 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. Gee, 228 S.W.3d 628, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1064, 2007 WL 2088582 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Hugh Gee appeals from his conviction for possession of a controlled substance. He contends the trial court erred in admitting evidence of uncharged crimes. Upon review of the briefs and the record, we find no error and affirm the judgment of conviction. We have provided the parties with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision, because a published opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose.

AFFIRMED. Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Hugh Gee appeals from his conviction for possession of a controlled substance. He contends the trial court erred in admitting evidence of uncharged crimes. Upon review of the briefs and the record, we find no error and affirm the judgment of conviction. We have provided the parties with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision, because a published opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose.

AFFIRMED. Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

228 S.W.3d 628, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1064, 2007 WL 2088582, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-gee-moctapp-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack