State v. Rohling

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Rohling

359 S.W.3d 567, 2012 WL 612483, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 262

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 28, 2012·No. WD 73753, WD 74597·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Candice Rohling was convicted of burglary in the second degree and misdemeanor receiving stolen property in the Circuit Court of Pettis County. She appeals the burglary conviction, arguing that there was insufficient evidence that she was present at the scene of the burglary, or that she possessed the requisite intent to steal. We affirm. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, an unpublished memorandum setting forth the reasons for this order has been provided to the parties. Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Candice Rohling was convicted of burglary in the second degree and misdemeanor receiving stolen property in the Circuit Court of Pettis County. She appeals the burglary conviction, arguing that there was insufficient evidence that she was present at the scene of the burglary, or that she possessed the requisite intent to steal. We affirm. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, an unpublished memorandum setting forth the reasons for this order has been provided to the parties. Rule 30.25(b).

State v. Rohling, 359 S.W.3d 567, 2012 WL 612483, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 262 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

359 S.W.3d 567 (State v. Rohling) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related