State v. McFarland

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. McFarland

533 S.W.3d 278

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 21, 2017

DocketWD 79957

StatusPublished

This text of 533 S.W.3d 278 (State v. McFarland) 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. McFarland, 533 S.W.3d 278 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Artrae McFarland appeals his convictions for forcible sodomy, felonious restraint, and two counts of armed criminal action following a jury trial in the Circuit Court of Clay County. McFarland argues that the trial court erred in admitting, over objection, testimony from the Victim’s mother that he claims constituted hearsay in addition to being cumulative and irrelevant. Finding no error, we affirm. Because a published opinion would have no prece-dential value, a memorandum of law has been provided to the parties. Missouri Supreme Court Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Artrae McFarland appeals his convictions for forcible sodomy, felonious restraint, and two counts of armed criminal action following a jury trial in the Circuit Court of Clay County. McFarland argues that the trial court erred in admitting, over objection, testimony from the Victim’s mother that he claims constituted hearsay in addition to being cumulative and irrelevant. Finding no error, we affirm. Because a published opinion would have no prece-dential value, a memorandum of law has been provided to the parties. Missouri Supreme Court Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

533 S.W.3d 278, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-mcfarland-moctapp-2017.