State v. Murphy

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Murphy

518 S.W.3d 902, 2017 WL 2257588, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 474

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 23, 2017

DocketED 104517

StatusPublished

This text of 518 S.W.3d 902 (State v. Murphy) 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. Murphy, 518 S.W.3d 902, 2017 WL 2257588, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 474 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Colten Murphy appeals from the judgment entered on his convictions after a jury trial for one count of tampering in the first degree. The evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, and the court did not abuse its discretion in failing to declare a mistrial during voir dire. We affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order 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.

Colten Murphy appeals from the judgment entered on his convictions after a jury trial for one count of tampering in the first degree. The evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, and the court did not abuse its discretion in failing to declare a mistrial during voir dire. We affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

518 S.W.3d 902, 2017 WL 2257588, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 474, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-murphy-moctapp-2017.