State v. Tran

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Tran

528 S.W.3d 915

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 26, 2017·No. WD 79177·Published

Opinion

Order

Per Curiam

John Tran appeals from his convictions for first-degree robbery and armed criminal action, Tran contends the circuit court erred in not allowing defense counsel to cross-examine a witness about a prior inconsistent statement. Upon review of the briefs and the record, we find no error and affirm the judgment. We have provided the parties with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision, because a published opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose.

AFFIRMED. Rule 30.25(b)

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

Order

Per Curiam

John Tran appeals from his convictions for first-degree robbery and armed criminal action, Tran contends the circuit court erred in not allowing defense counsel to cross-examine a witness about a prior inconsistent statement. Upon review of the briefs and the record, we find no error and affirm the judgment. We have provided the parties with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision, because a published opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose.

AFFIRMED. Rule 30.25(b)

State v. Tran, 528 S.W.3d 915 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

528 S.W.3d 915 (State v. Tran) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.