State v. Spain

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Spain

524 S.W.3d 615, 2017 WL 3481033

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 15, 2017

DocketNo. ED 104566

StatusPublished

This text of 524 S.W.3d 615 (State v. Spain) 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. Spain, 524 S.W.3d 615, 2017 WL 3481033 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

. John E. Spain appeals his conviction by a City of St. Louis jury of the unlawful use of drug paraphernalia with the intent to use to manufacture methamphetamine arising out' of a search of Spain’s apartment following a 911 call reporting the smell of methamphetamine coming from Spain’s apartment. Spain, a prior and persistent offender, was sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment. Spain’s sole point on appeal is that the trial court abused its discretion in sustaining the State’s objection to Spain’s introduction of the 911 call reporting the smell of methamphetamine coming from Spain’s apartment. Finding no error of law, we affirm.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties' have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 30.25.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM

. John E. Spain appeals his conviction by a City of St. Louis jury of the unlawful use of drug paraphernalia with the intent to use to manufacture methamphetamine arising out' of a search of Spain’s apartment following a 911 call reporting the smell of methamphetamine coming from Spain’s apartment. Spain, a prior and persistent offender, was sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment. Spain’s sole point on appeal is that the trial court abused its discretion in sustaining the State’s objection to Spain’s introduction of the 911 call reporting the smell of methamphetamine coming from Spain’s apartment. Finding no error of law, we affirm.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties' have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 30.25.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

524 S.W.3d 615, 2017 WL 3481033, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-spain-moctapp-2017.