State v. Wallis

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Wallis

749 S.W.2d 714, 1988 Mo. App. LEXIS 1270, 1988 WL 45309

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided May 10, 1988·No. No. 53310·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

A jury found defendant guilty of stealing (•§ 570.030, RSMo) and declared punishment at “no imprisonment but a fine, in an amount to be determined by the Court”. The trial court imposed a fine of $2,500.00 for the offense and further ordered defendant to pay $36.00 to the Crime Victims’ Compensation Fund. Defendant appeals asserting his motion for judgment of acquittal should have been sustained because the evidence addressed was legally insufficient to support a conviction for stealing.

We have reviewed the entire record and find there is ample evidence to support defendant’s conviction. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

A jury found defendant guilty of stealing (•§ 570.030, RSMo) and declared punishment at “no imprisonment but a fine, in an amount to be determined by the Court”. The trial court imposed a fine of $2,500.00 for the offense and further ordered defendant to pay $36.00 to the Crime Victims’ Compensation Fund. Defendant appeals asserting his motion for judgment of acquittal should have been sustained because the evidence addressed was legally insufficient to support a conviction for stealing.

We have reviewed the entire record and find there is ample evidence to support defendant’s conviction. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).

State v. Wallis, 749 S.W.2d 714, 1988 Mo. App. LEXIS 1270, 1988 WL 45309 (Mo. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

749 S.W.2d 714 (State v. Wallis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.