State v. Stokes

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Stokes

472 S.W.3d 267, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 1061, 2015 WL 6160762

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 20, 2015

DocketNo. ED 101923

StatusPublished

This text of 472 S.W.3d 267 (State v. Stokes) 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. Stokes, 472 S.W.3d 267, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 1061, 2015 WL 6160762 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Avonte Stokes (Defendant) appeals from the judgment upon his convictions by a jury for two counts of child molestation in the first degree, in violation of Section 566.067, RSMo 2000.¹ The trial court sus-’ pended imposition of sentence and placed Defendant on probation for a period of five years. After violating his probation, the trial court revoked Defendant’s, probation and sentenced him to seven-years’ imprisonment on each count, to be served concurrently. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find , the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion 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

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Avonte Stokes (Defendant) appeals from the judgment upon his convictions by a jury for two counts of child molestation in the first degree, in violation of Section 566.067, RSMo 2000.¹ The trial court sus-’ pended imposition of sentence and placed Defendant on probation for a period of five years. After violating his probation, the trial court revoked Defendant’s, probation and sentenced him to seven-years’ imprisonment on each count, to be served concurrently. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find , the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

472 S.W.3d 267, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 1061, 2015 WL 6160762, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-stokes-moctapp-2015.