State v. Whitfield

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Whitfield

891 S.W.2d 527, 1994 Mo. App. LEXIS 1968, 1994 WL 705420

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Whitfield. Read the opinion of the Court — 1997 Mo. App. LEXIS 1157 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 20, 1994·No. No. 61849·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals his conviction by a jury for second degree burglary, § 569.170, RSMo 1986. He was sentenced by the court as a prior, persistent and class X offender to a twenty year prison term. We affirm. We have reviewed the record and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for them 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.

Defendant appeals his conviction by a jury for second degree burglary, § 569.170, RSMo 1986. He was sentenced by the court as a prior, persistent and class X offender to a twenty year prison term. We affirm. We have reviewed the record and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for them information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

State v. Whitfield, 891 S.W.2d 527, 1994 Mo. App. LEXIS 1968, 1994 WL 705420 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

891 S.W.2d 527 (State v. Whitfield) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.