State v. Knopfel

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Knopfel

822 S.W.2d 436, 1991 Mo. App. LEXIS 1567

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 15, 1991·No. Nos. 58437, 59637·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

A jury convicted defendant of assault, third degree, two counts of tampering, first [437]*437degree, burglary, second degree and stealing. The court sentenced defendant as a persistent offender and a Class X offender. Defendant appeals his convictions and sentences and also appeals the trial court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 motion. These appeals have been consolidated.

Opinions on defendant’s appeals reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. Accordingly, we affirm defendant’s convictions and sentences in accordance with Rule 30.25(b) and affirm the judgment on his Rule 29.15 motion in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

A jury convicted defendant of assault, third degree, two counts of tampering, first [437]*437degree, burglary, second degree and stealing. The court sentenced defendant as a persistent offender and a Class X offender. Defendant appeals his convictions and sentences and also appeals the trial court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 motion. These appeals have been consolidated.

Opinions on defendant’s appeals reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. Accordingly, we affirm defendant’s convictions and sentences in accordance with Rule 30.25(b) and affirm the judgment on his Rule 29.15 motion in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

State v. Knopfel, 822 S.W.2d 436, 1991 Mo. App. LEXIS 1567 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

822 S.W.2d 436 (State v. Knopfel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.