State v. Lindsey

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Lindsey

309 S.W.3d 873, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 614, 2010 WL 1860038

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Lindsey. Read the opinion of the Court — 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 237 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided May 11, 2010·No. ED 93645·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Torrey Lindsey appeals the judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of second-degree trafficking. We find that the trial court did not err in overruling Lindsey’s objection to testimony regarding an anonymous tip, nor did the court err in excluding certain testimony at trial. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential 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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Torrey Lindsey appeals the judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of second-degree trafficking. We find that the trial court did not err in overruling Lindsey’s objection to testimony regarding an anonymous tip, nor did the court err in excluding certain testimony at trial. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential 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).

State v. Lindsey, 309 S.W.3d 873, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 614, 2010 WL 1860038 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

309 S.W.3d 873 (State v. Lindsey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.