State v. Weinert

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Weinert

502 S.W.3d 78, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1047, 2016 WL 6212067

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 25, 2016·No. ED 102896·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Bradley Weinert (“Defendant”) appeals his conviction, after a jury trial, for driving while intoxicated, in violation of Section 577.010. Pursuant to Section 577.023, Defendant was sentenced as a chronic offender to eleven years of imprisonment. We affirm.

The judgment of the trial court is not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order 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.

Bradley Weinert (“Defendant”) appeals his conviction, after a jury trial, for driving while intoxicated, in violation of Section 577.010. Pursuant to Section 577.023, Defendant was sentenced as a chronic offender to eleven years of imprisonment. We affirm.

The judgment of the trial court is not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

State v. Weinert, 502 S.W.3d 78, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1047, 2016 WL 6212067 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

502 S.W.3d 78 (State v. Weinert) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related