State v. Hemphill

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Hemphill

284 S.W.3d 778, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 775, 2009 WL 1589134

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 9, 2009

DocketED 91268

StatusPublished

This text of 284 S.W.3d 778 (State v. Hemphill) 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. Hemphill, 284 S.W.3d 778, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 775, 2009 WL 1589134 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

James J. Hemphill appeals the judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of robbery in the first degree, armed criminal action in the first degree, tampering in the first degree and resisting arrest. We find that the trial court did not err in *779 denying the motion to suppress the pretrial and in-court identifications of Hemp-hill. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment under Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

James J. Hemphill appeals the judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of robbery in the first degree, armed criminal action in the first degree, tampering in the first degree and resisting arrest. We find that the trial court did not err in *779 denying the motion to suppress the pretrial and in-court identifications of Hemp-hill. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment under Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

284 S.W.3d 778, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 775, 2009 WL 1589134, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hemphill-moctapp-2009.