State v. Whitfield

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Whitfield

766 S.W.2d 492, 1989 Mo. App. LEXIS 371, 1989 WL 24768

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 21, 1989

DocketNo. 54653

StatusPublished

This text of 766 S.W.2d 492 (State v. Whitfield) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Whitfield, 766 S.W.2d 492, 1989 Mo. App. LEXIS 371, 1989 WL 24768 (Mo. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Chong Hwa Whitfield, appeals from her jury conviction of Bribery of a Public Servant, § 576.010 RSMo.1986 and her sentence of 60 days imprisonment and fine of $5,000. A co-defendant, Kwicha Worstell, was charged with the same offense and the two defendants were tried together in a consolidated case. Separate appeals were taken.

In this appeal, defendant Whitfield raises the same issues as co-defendant Worstell raised in her appeal. We have decided these issues by written opinion in State v. Worstell, No. 54654, 767 S.W.2d 352 and found no error of law.

[493]*493An opinion in this case reciting the same basic facts and restating the same principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties, however, have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

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