State v. VORCE

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. VORCE

323 S.W.3d 80, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1366, 2010 WL 3971343

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 12, 2010·No. ED 94092·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Jessica Vorce (Defendant) appeals the judgment of conviction in a court-tried case of possession of intoxicating liquor by a minor. Defendant claims the trial court erred in finding her guilty because the State failed to provide sufficient and competent evidence to prove that: (1) she was in possession of intoxicating liquor; and (2) she was a minor.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and no error *81 of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, prepared a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Jessica Vorce (Defendant) appeals the judgment of conviction in a court-tried case of possession of intoxicating liquor by a minor. Defendant claims the trial court erred in finding her guilty because the State failed to provide sufficient and competent evidence to prove that: (1) she was in possession of intoxicating liquor; and (2) she was a minor.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and no error *81 of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, prepared a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

State v. VORCE, 323 S.W.3d 80, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1366, 2010 WL 3971343 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

323 S.W.3d 80 (State v. VORCE) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.