State v. Tietge

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Tietge

449 S.W.3d 790, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 1331, 2014 WL 6679198

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided November 25, 2014·No. WD 76113·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Following a bench trial, Dustin Tietge was convicted in the Circuit Court of Pet-tis County of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver, distribute, and sell, in violation of § 195.211, RSMo and of second-degree drug trafficking in violation of § 195.223, RSMo. Tietge appeals, contending that the methamphetamine discovered on his person during a traffic stop should have been suppressed as evidence, because it was discovered during an unlawful search. We affirm. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, an unpublished memorandum setting for the reasons for this order has been provided to the parties. Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Following a bench trial, Dustin Tietge was convicted in the Circuit Court of Pet-tis County of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver, distribute, and sell, in violation of § 195.211, RSMo and of second-degree drug trafficking in violation of § 195.223, RSMo. Tietge appeals, contending that the methamphetamine discovered on his person during a traffic stop should have been suppressed as evidence, because it was discovered during an unlawful search. We affirm. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, an unpublished memorandum setting for the reasons for this order has been provided to the parties. Rule 30.25(b).

State v. Tietge, 449 S.W.3d 790, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 1331, 2014 WL 6679198 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

449 S.W.3d 790 (State v. Tietge) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.