State v. Meeks

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Meeks

363 S.W.3d 178, 2012 WL 381770, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 151

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 7, 2012

DocketED 96903

StatusPublished

This text of 363 S.W.3d 178 (State v. Meeks) 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. Meeks, 363 S.W.3d 178, 2012 WL 381770, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 151 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Decalos Meeks appeals from the trial court’s judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of first-degree tampering of a motor vehicle and resisting or interfering with arrest. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting certain testimony of the complaining witness. State v. Chaney, 967 S.W.2d 47, 55 (Mo. banc 1998). An extended opinion would have no precedential 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).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Decalos Meeks appeals from the trial court’s judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of first-degree tampering of a motor vehicle and resisting or interfering with arrest. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting certain testimony of the complaining witness. State v. Chaney, 967 S.W.2d 47, 55 (Mo. banc 1998). An extended opinion would have no precedential 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).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

363 S.W.3d 178, 2012 WL 381770, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 151, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-meeks-moctapp-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack