State v. Medina-Laureano

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Medina-Laureano

485 S.W.3d 826, 2016 WL 1469979, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 341

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 12, 2016·No. No. ED 102914·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Gaudencio Medina-Laureano appeals from the trial court’s judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of second-degree assault and sentencing him to a year in prison. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court did not [827] clearly abuse its broad discretion in excluding certain testimony. State v. Chaney, 967 S.W.2d 47, 55 (Mo.banc 1998). An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Criminal Procedure 30.25(b).

i

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Gaudencio Medina-Laureano appeals from the trial court’s judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of second-degree assault and sentencing him to a year in prison. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court did not [827] clearly abuse its broad discretion in excluding certain testimony. State v. Chaney, 967 S.W.2d 47, 55 (Mo.banc 1998). An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Criminal Procedure 30.25(b).

i

State v. Medina-Laureano, 485 S.W.3d 826, 2016 WL 1469979, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 341 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

485 S.W.3d 826 (State v. Medina-Laureano) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related