State v. Symington

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Symington

548 S.W.3d 921

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 12, 2018

DocketWD 79872

StatusPublished

This text of 548 S.W.3d 921 (State v. Symington) 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. Symington, 548 S.W.3d 921 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Patrick Symington appeals his conviction following bench trial in Buchanan County for enticement of a child. He presents three points on appeal. First, he claims the trial court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal. Second, he argues the trial court erred in admitting propensity evidence. Finally, Symington says the trial court erred in admitting Facebook messages without a foundation. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).

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

PER CURIAM:

Patrick Symington appeals his conviction following bench trial in Buchanan County for enticement of a child. He presents three points on appeal. First, he claims the trial court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal. Second, he argues the trial court erred in admitting propensity evidence. Finally, Symington says the trial court erred in admitting Facebook messages without a foundation. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

548 S.W.3d 921, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-symington-moctapp-2018.