State v. Stewart

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Stewart

484 S.W.3d 106, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 1352, 2015 WL 9595394

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 8, 2015

DocketWD 78174

StatusPublished

This text of 484 S.W.3d 106 (State v. Stewart) 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. Stewart, 484 S.W.3d 106, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 1352, 2015 WL 9595394 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Lawrence Stewart appeals his convictions and sentences for the class C felony burglary in the second degree, section 569.170, RSMo 2000, and the class C felony stealing, section 570.030, RSMo Cum. Supp. 2013. Stewart challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support both convictions. Specifically, he contends that the evidence did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that (1) the value of stolen air conditioners was $500 or more and (2) he knowingly entered the motel room from which they were stolen unlawfully. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

The judgment of convictions is affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Lawrence Stewart appeals his convictions and sentences for the class C felony burglary in the second degree, section 569.170, RSMo 2000, and the class C felony stealing, section 570.030, RSMo Cum. Supp. 2013. Stewart challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support both convictions. Specifically, he contends that the evidence did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that (1) the value of stolen air conditioners was $500 or more and (2) he knowingly entered the motel room from which they were stolen unlawfully. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

The judgment of convictions is affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

484 S.W.3d 106, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 1352, 2015 WL 9595394, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-stewart-moctapp-2015.