State v. Moore

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Moore

133 S.W.3d 112, 2004 Mo. App. LEXIS 196, 2004 WL 292221

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Moore. Read the opinion of the Court — 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 1697 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 17, 2004·No. No. ED 81734·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Sulayman Moore (“Defendant”) appeals the judgment entered upon his conviction in a bench trial of trafficking drugs in the second degree. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. An extended opinion would be of no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Sulayman Moore (“Defendant”) appeals the judgment entered upon his conviction in a bench trial of trafficking drugs in the second degree. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. An extended opinion would be of no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

State v. Moore, 133 S.W.3d 112, 2004 Mo. App. LEXIS 196, 2004 WL 292221 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

133 S.W.3d 112 (State v. Moore) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.