State v. Hudson

835 S.W.2d 522, 1992 Mo. App. LEXIS 1114
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Hudson. Read the opinion of the Court — 1991 Mo. App. LEXIS 1788
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided July 7, 1992·No. Nos. 57878, 59044·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

In this jury-tried case, defendant was convicted of illegal possession of cocaine. He appealed. Our court remanded for an evidentiary hearing to determine if the State used its peremptory challenges in violation of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986). State v. Hudson, 815 S.W.2d 430 (Mo.App. E.D.1991).

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgments are affirmed in accordance with Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).

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

State v. Hudson, 835 S.W.2d 522, 1992 Mo. App. LEXIS 1114 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992).

835 S.W.2d 522 (State v. Hudson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Batson v. Kentucky
476 U.S. 79 (Supreme Court, 1986)
State v. Hudson
815 S.W.2d 430 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1991)