State v. Teran

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Teran

502 S.W.3d 76, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1050, 2016 WL 6212058

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 25, 2016

DocketNo. ED103451

StatusPublished

This text of 502 S.W.3d 76 (State v. Teran) 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. Teran, 502 S.W.3d 76, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1050, 2016 WL 6212058 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Italo R. Pacheco Teran was convicted after a jury trial of first-degree burglary, two counts of felonious restraint, first-degree rape, three counts of first-degree sodomy, and abuse or neglect of a child. He appeals his conviction on Count VII, the class B felony of abuse or neglect of a child, arguing there was insufficient evidence to convict him of this offense. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, and find the claim of error to be without merit. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Italo R. Pacheco Teran was convicted after a jury trial of first-degree burglary, two counts of felonious restraint, first-degree rape, three counts of first-degree sodomy, and abuse or neglect of a child. He appeals his conviction on Count VII, the class B felony of abuse or neglect of a child, arguing there was insufficient evidence to convict him of this offense. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, and find the claim of error to be without merit. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

502 S.W.3d 76, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1050, 2016 WL 6212058, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-teran-moctapp-2016.