State v. Silinzy
883 S.W.2d 112, 1994 Mo. App. LEXIS 1442, 1994 WL 493940
Opinion
ORDER
Defendant appeals after a jury convicted him of first degree assault- and armed criminal action. We affirm.
Further, we find no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion and affirm by summary order. Rule 30.-25(b). A memorandum setting forth the rea[113]*113sons for our decision has been issued to the parties for their use only.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. Silinzy, 883 S.W.2d 112, 1994 Mo. App. LEXIS 1442, 1994 WL 493940 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994).
883 S.W.2d 112 (State v. Silinzy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.