State v. Isbell

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Isbell

210 S.W.3d 310, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1563, 2006 WL 3007757

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 24, 2006·No. No. ED 86996·Published

Opinion

[311] ORDER

PER CURIAM.

James Isbell (“defendant”) appeals the judgment on his conviction of one count of sexual misconduct involving a child. Defendant claims the trial court erred in entering its judgment because there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. 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 judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 80.25(b).

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

[311] ORDER

PER CURIAM.

James Isbell (“defendant”) appeals the judgment on his conviction of one count of sexual misconduct involving a child. Defendant claims the trial court erred in entering its judgment because there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. 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 judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 80.25(b).

State v. Isbell, 210 S.W.3d 310, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1563, 2006 WL 3007757 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

210 S.W.3d 310 (State v. Isbell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.