State v. McKinney

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. McKinney

247 S.W.3d 920, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 387, 2008 WL 762269

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 25, 2008

DocketWD 67467

StatusPublished

This text of 247 S.W.3d 920 (State v. McKinney) 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. McKinney, 247 S.W.3d 920, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 387, 2008 WL 762269 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Otis D. McKinney, Jr. appeals his conviction for assault in the first degree under § 565.050, RSMo (Count I), abuse of a child under § 568.060, RSMo (Count II), and two counts of endangering the welfare of a child in the first degree under § 568.045, RSMo (Counts III and IV). On appeal, Mr. McKinney claims that the circuit court erred because there was insufficient evidence offered at trial to support his convictions on Counts I and III. Specifically, Mr. McKinney asserts that there was insufficient evidence offered at trial to support the allegation of Count III that he committed the class B felony of endangering the welfare of a child in the first degree as part of a “ritual or ceremony.” Mr. McKinney further alleges that his conviction for assault in the first degree must be reversed because there was insufficient evidence to support a finding that he “knowingly” caused serious physical injury to the Victim.

For the reasons set forth in the memorandum provided to the parties, 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.

Otis D. McKinney, Jr. appeals his conviction for assault in the first degree under § 565.050, RSMo (Count I), abuse of a child under § 568.060, RSMo (Count II), and two counts of endangering the welfare of a child in the first degree under § 568.045, RSMo (Counts III and IV). On appeal, Mr. McKinney claims that the circuit court erred because there was insufficient evidence offered at trial to support his convictions on Counts I and III. Specifically, Mr. McKinney asserts that there was insufficient evidence offered at trial to support the allegation of Count III that he committed the class B felony of endangering the welfare of a child in the first degree as part of a “ritual or ceremony.” Mr. McKinney further alleges that his conviction for assault in the first degree must be reversed because there was insufficient evidence to support a finding that he “knowingly” caused serious physical injury to the Victim.

For the reasons set forth in the memorandum provided to the parties, we affirm. Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

247 S.W.3d 920, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 387, 2008 WL 762269, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-mckinney-moctapp-2008.