State v. Hampton

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Hampton

541 S.W.3d 635

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 19, 2017·No. ED 104920·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

*636Niesha Hampton appeals from the judgment entered on her convictions after a jury trial for statutory rape and statutory sodomy. The evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, and we find no other errors. 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.

*636Niesha Hampton appeals from the judgment entered on her convictions after a jury trial for statutory rape and statutory sodomy. The evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, and we find no other errors. 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. Hampton, 541 S.W.3d 635 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

541 S.W.3d 635 (State v. Hampton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.