State v. Lancaster

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Lancaster

464 S.W.3d 576, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 701, 2015 WL 4082884

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 30, 2015·No. WD 77429·Published

Opinion

ORDER

Per curiam:

Keith Lancaster appeals from the trial court’s entry of judgment convicting him of driving while intoxicated as a persistent offender. Lancaster argues that the trial court erred in overruling his motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of the evidence and in imposing a judgment and sentence against him because there was insufficient evidence of a causal connection between the presence of drugs in Lancaster’s system and an impaired ability to operate a motor vehicle. We affirm. Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

Per curiam:

Keith Lancaster appeals from the trial court’s entry of judgment convicting him of driving while intoxicated as a persistent offender. Lancaster argues that the trial court erred in overruling his motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of the evidence and in imposing a judgment and sentence against him because there was insufficient evidence of a causal connection between the presence of drugs in Lancaster’s system and an impaired ability to operate a motor vehicle. We affirm. Rule 30.25(b).

State v. Lancaster, 464 S.W.3d 576, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 701, 2015 WL 4082884 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

464 S.W.3d 576 (State v. Lancaster) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.