State v. Smith

318 S.W.3d 787, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1151, 2010 WL 3398402
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided August 31, 2010·No. ED 93438·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

James A. Smith appeals from the trial court’s judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of possession of a controlled substance. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court committed no plain error. Rule 30.20; 1 *788 State v. Washington, 260 S.W.3d 875, 879 (Mo.App. E.D.2008). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Criminal Procedure 30.25(b).

1

. All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P.2008, unless otherwise indicated.

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

State v. Smith, 318 S.W.3d 787, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1151, 2010 WL 3398402 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

318 S.W.3d 787 (State v. Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In Re the Care & Treatment of Tucker
318 S.W.3d 787 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2010)