State v. Suttles

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Suttles

576 S.W.3d 615

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 11, 2019

DocketNo. ED 106859

StatusPublished

This text of 576 S.W.3d 615 (State v. Suttles) 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. Suttles, 576 S.W.3d 615 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Michael Suttles appeals from the judgment entered on his convictions after a jury trial for statutory sodomy, sexual misconduct with a child and furnishing pornographic material to a minor. There was no error in the admission of expert testimony regarding the general characteristics of children disclosing allegations of sexual abuse. We affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

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

PER CURIAM.

Michael Suttles appeals from the judgment entered on his convictions after a jury trial for statutory sodomy, sexual misconduct with a child and furnishing pornographic material to a minor. There was no error in the admission of expert testimony regarding the general characteristics of children disclosing allegations of sexual abuse. We affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

576 S.W.3d 615, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-suttles-moctapp-2019.