State v. Higgins

364 S.W.3d 668, 2012 WL 453662, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 163
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 14, 2012·No. ED 95227·Published

Opinion

*669 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

David Higgins appeals the judgment entered upon a jury’s verdict convicting him of stealing over $500.00. We find that the trial court did not plainly err in denying Higgins’ motion for a mistrial, in questioning him about his prior felony convictions, nor in finding him to be a persistent offender. We affirm.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed under Rule 30.25(b).

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

State v. Higgins, 364 S.W.3d 668, 2012 WL 453662, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 163 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

364 S.W.3d 668 (State v. Higgins) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

SIEH PROPERTIES v. Horne
364 S.W.3d 668 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2012)