State v. Moore

318 S.W.3d 326, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1081, 2010 WL 3314793
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided August 24, 2010·No. ED 93488·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Othel Moore (Defendant) appeals the judgment of conviction entered after a jury found him guilty of two counts of robbery in the first degree and two counts of armed criminal action. Defendant claims the trial court erred in: (1) denying his motion to sever the offenses, and (2) sustaining the State’s objection to defense counsel’s hypothetical question to the veni-re panel. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and no error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, prepared a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

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

State v. Moore, 318 S.W.3d 326, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1081, 2010 WL 3314793 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

318 S.W.3d 326 (State v. Moore) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Carafeno v. Meyr
318 S.W.3d 326 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2010)