State v. Rhoden

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Rhoden

201 S.W.3d 70, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1327, 2006 WL 2597955

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 12, 2006

DocketED 86731

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 201 S.W.3d 70 (State v. Rhoden) 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. Rhoden, 201 S.W.3d 70, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1327, 2006 WL 2597955 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Cecil Rhoden, Jr., appeals the judgment entered after a jury trial on his convictions for five counts of statutory sodomy in the first degree and two counts of statutory sodomy in the second degree. We find no plain error in the trial court’s decision to sustain objections to admission of prior inconsistent statements where the foundation for such statements was inadequate. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment under Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Cecil Rhoden, Jr., appeals the judgment entered after a jury trial on his convictions for five counts of statutory sodomy in the first degree and two counts of statutory sodomy in the second degree. We find no plain error in the trial court’s decision to sustain objections to admission of prior inconsistent statements where the foundation for such statements was inadequate. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment under Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

201 S.W.3d 70, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1327, 2006 WL 2597955, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-rhoden-moctapp-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack