State v. Sneed

362 S.W.3d 481, 2012 WL 941088, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 346
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided March 20, 2012·No. ED 95997·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

*482 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Bradley Sneed (Defendant) appeals from a judgment entered in the Circuit Court of St. Charles County following his conviction for driving while intoxicated. Defendant contends that the trial court erred by failing to hold a hearing on Defendant’s allegation of jury misconduct and overruling his motion for a new trial. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the trial court’s decision was not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

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

State v. Sneed, 362 S.W.3d 481, 2012 WL 941088, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 346 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

362 S.W.3d 481 (State v. Sneed) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sneed v. State
412 S.W.3d 903 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2013)