State v. Williams

954 S.W.2d 15, 1997 Mo. App. LEXIS 1774, 1997 WL 629934
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Williams. Read the opinion of the Court — 1994 Mo. App. LEXIS 1846
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 14, 1997·No. No. 71166·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Louis Williams, Defendant, appeals from his jury conviction for first degree robbery. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court did not plainly err in allowing certain arguments by the prosecuting attorney. Rule 29.12(b). An extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose. Rule 30.25(b). 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

State v. Williams, 954 S.W.2d 15, 1997 Mo. App. LEXIS 1774, 1997 WL 629934 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997).

954 S.W.2d 15 (State v. Williams) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.