State v. Ray

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Ray

93 S.W.3d 807, 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 2476, 2002 WL 31863811

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Ray. Read the opinion of the Court — 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1474 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 24, 2002·No. ED 79581·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from the judgment entered on a jury verdict finding her guilty of possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance, in violation of Section 195.211 RSMo (1994). The trial court found her to be a prior and persistent offender and sentenced her to ten years imprisonment.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

*808 The judgment 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.

Defendant appeals from the judgment entered on a jury verdict finding her guilty of possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance, in violation of Section 195.211 RSMo (1994). The trial court found her to be a prior and persistent offender and sentenced her to ten years imprisonment.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

*808 The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).

State v. Ray, 93 S.W.3d 807, 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 2476, 2002 WL 31863811 (Mo. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

93 S.W.3d 807 (State v. Ray) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.