State v. Nash

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Nash

472 S.W.3d 655, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 1069, 2015 WL 6161156

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 20, 2015

DocketNo. ED 102250

StatusPublished

This text of 472 S.W.3d 655 (State v. Nash) 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. Nash, 472 S.W.3d 655, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 1069, 2015 WL 6161156 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

The defendant, Dennis Nash, appeals the judgment and sentence entered by the Circuit Court of St. Francois County following his conviction by a jury of one count of first-degree arson, in violation of section 569.040 RSMo. (Supp. 2014), and one count of first-degree property damage, in violation of section 569.100.¹ The trial court sentenced the defendant as a prior and persistent offender to 25 years of imprisonment for the arson and to a concurrent term of seven years for the property damage. Finding no error, we affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum, for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision.

We affirm the trial court’s judgment. Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM

The defendant, Dennis Nash, appeals the judgment and sentence entered by the Circuit Court of St. Francois County following his conviction by a jury of one count of first-degree arson, in violation of section 569.040 RSMo. (Supp. 2014), and one count of first-degree property damage, in violation of section 569.100.¹ The trial court sentenced the defendant as a prior and persistent offender to 25 years of imprisonment for the arson and to a concurrent term of seven years for the property damage. Finding no error, we affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum, for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision.

We affirm the trial court’s judgment. Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

472 S.W.3d 655, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 1069, 2015 WL 6161156, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-nash-moctapp-2015.