State v. Shadwick

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Shadwick

130 S.W.3d 618, 2004 Mo. App. LEXIS 83, 2004 WL 116594

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 27, 2004

DocketED 81985

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 130 S.W.3d 618 (State v. Shadwick) 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. Shadwick, 130 S.W.3d 618, 2004 Mo. App. LEXIS 83, 2004 WL 116594 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Martez Shadwick, appeals from the judgment entered after a bench trial finding him guilty of murder in the first degree, in violation of Section 565.020 RSMo (2000), robbery in the first degree, in violation of Section 569.020 RSMo (2000), and two counts of armed criminal action, in violation of Section 571.015 RSMo (2000). The court found defendant to be a prior offender and sentenced him to terms of life imprisonment on the murder count, life imprisonment on the robbery count, and thirty years imprisonment on each of the armed criminal action counts, to be served concurrently.

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

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, Martez Shadwick, appeals from the judgment entered after a bench trial finding him guilty of murder in the first degree, in violation of Section 565.020 RSMo (2000), robbery in the first degree, in violation of Section 569.020 RSMo (2000), and two counts of armed criminal action, in violation of Section 571.015 RSMo (2000). The court found defendant to be a prior offender and sentenced him to terms of life imprisonment on the murder count, life imprisonment on the robbery count, and thirty years imprisonment on each of the armed criminal action counts, to be served concurrently.

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

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

130 S.W.3d 618, 2004 Mo. App. LEXIS 83, 2004 WL 116594, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-shadwick-moctapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack