State v. Moses

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Moses

285 S.W.3d 430, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 815, 2009 WL 1665354

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 16, 2009·No. ED 91712·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Reginald Moses (“defendant”) appeals the judgment on his conviction of forcible sodomy and armed criminal action. Defendant claims the trial court plainly erred in admitting the testimony of Officer Jean Burks (“Officer Burks”) concerning statements made to her by the victim.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Reginald Moses (“defendant”) appeals the judgment on his conviction of forcible sodomy and armed criminal action. Defendant claims the trial court plainly erred in admitting the testimony of Officer Jean Burks (“Officer Burks”) concerning statements made to her by the victim.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).

State v. Moses, 285 S.W.3d 430, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 815, 2009 WL 1665354 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

285 S.W.3d 430 (State v. Moses) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related