State v. Sickles

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Sickles

305 S.W.3d 504, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 340, 2010 WL 1027430

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided March 23, 2010·No. WD 68376·Published

Opinion

Order

PER CURIAM.

Following a jury trial, Joshua Sickles was convicted of distribution, delivery, or sale of a controlled substance and acquitted of second-degree murder. Sickles contends the circuit court erred in: (1) denying his motions for judgment of acquittal on the second-degree murder charge, and (2) overruling his objection to certain expert testimony. For reasons explained in a Memorandum provided to the parties, we find no error and affirm the judgment of conviction.

AFFIRMED. Rule 30.25(b).

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

Order

PER CURIAM.

Following a jury trial, Joshua Sickles was convicted of distribution, delivery, or sale of a controlled substance and acquitted of second-degree murder. Sickles contends the circuit court erred in: (1) denying his motions for judgment of acquittal on the second-degree murder charge, and (2) overruling his objection to certain expert testimony. For reasons explained in a Memorandum provided to the parties, we find no error and affirm the judgment of conviction.

AFFIRMED. Rule 30.25(b).

State v. Sickles, 305 S.W.3d 504, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 340, 2010 WL 1027430 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

305 S.W.3d 504 (State v. Sickles) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.