State v. Harwell

460 S.W.3d 479, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 366, 2015 WL 1548863
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 7, 2015·No. No. ED101575·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Dante Harwell (Defendant) appeals the trial court’s judgment entered after a jury trial convicting him of unlawful possession of a firearm. Defendant claims the trial court erred by overruling his Batson challenges to the State’s peremptory strikes of potential jurors after voir dire, and by overruling defense counsel’s objections to certain testimony at trial. Defendant also challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and have determined that an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties [480] setting forth the reasons for our decision. Rule 30.25(b).

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

State v. Harwell, 460 S.W.3d 479, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 366, 2015 WL 1548863 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015).

460 S.W.3d 479 (State v. Harwell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related