State v. Martin

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Martin

553 S.W.3d 900

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 14, 2018

DocketNo. ED 105709

StatusPublished

This text of 553 S.W.3d 900 (State v. Martin) 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. Martin, 553 S.W.3d 900 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Steven Martin appeals from the judgment entered on his conviction after a jury trial for burglary in the second degree. The evidence was sufficient and there was no other prejudicial error at trial. We affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

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

PER CURIAM.

Steven Martin appeals from the judgment entered on his conviction after a jury trial for burglary in the second degree. The evidence was sufficient and there was no other prejudicial error at trial. We affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

553 S.W.3d 900, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-martin-moctapp-2018.