State v. Livingston

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Livingston

547 S.W.3d 606

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 22, 2018

DocketNo. ED 105502

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 547 S.W.3d 606 (State v. Livingston) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Livingston, 547 S.W.3d 606 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

*607Berry Livingston ("Defendant") appeals from the Judgment upon his conviction after a jury trial on one count of possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute in violation of Section 195.211 RSMo. 2000¹ ^,² and one count of possession of drug paraphernalia with intent to use in violation of Section 195.233³ . We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the Judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

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

PER CURIAM

*607Berry Livingston ("Defendant") appeals from the Judgment upon his conviction after a jury trial on one count of possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute in violation of Section 195.211 RSMo. 2000¹ ^,² and one count of possession of drug paraphernalia with intent to use in violation of Section 195.233³ . We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the Judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

547 S.W.3d 606, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-livingston-moctapp-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack