State v. Nenninger

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Nenninger

250 S.W.3d 439, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 552, 2008 WL 1788034

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 22, 2008·No. No. ED 89856·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

John Nenninger appeals the judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of forgery. We find that there was sufficient evidence from which a reasonable juror could have found the Appellant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment under Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

John Nenninger appeals the judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of forgery. We find that there was sufficient evidence from which a reasonable juror could have found the Appellant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment under Rule 30.25(b).

State v. Nenninger, 250 S.W.3d 439, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 552, 2008 WL 1788034 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

250 S.W.3d 439 (State v. Nenninger) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.