State v. Hargis

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Hargis

495 S.W.3d 826, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 774, 2016 WL 4362122

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 16, 2016

DocketNo. ED 102948

StatusPublished

This text of 495 S.W.3d 826 (State v. Hargis) 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. Hargis, 495 S.W.3d 826, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 774, 2016 WL 4362122 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

[827]*827ORDER

PER CURIAM

Ronald M. Hargis (Defendant) • appeals from the judgment upon his .convictions following a jury trial for one count of burglary in the first degree, in violation of Section 569.160, RSMo 2000¹; one count of robbery in the first degree, in violation of Section 569.020; three counts of armed criminal action, in violation of Section 571.015; and two counts of assault in the first degree, in violation of Section 565.050. The trial court sentenced Defendant to eight years imprisonment on the burglary count and twelve years imprisonment on the remaining counts, which were to be served concurrent to each other but consecutive to the burglary count, for a total of twenty years imprisonment. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

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

[827]*827ORDER

PER CURIAM

Ronald M. Hargis (Defendant) • appeals from the judgment upon his .convictions following a jury trial for one count of burglary in the first degree, in violation of Section 569.160, RSMo 2000¹; one count of robbery in the first degree, in violation of Section 569.020; three counts of armed criminal action, in violation of Section 571.015; and two counts of assault in the first degree, in violation of Section 565.050. The trial court sentenced Defendant to eight years imprisonment on the burglary count and twelve years imprisonment on the remaining counts, which were to be served concurrent to each other but consecutive to the burglary count, for a total of twenty years imprisonment. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

495 S.W.3d 826, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 774, 2016 WL 4362122, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hargis-moctapp-2016.