State v. Wilson

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Wilson

304 S.W.3d 277, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 40, 2010 WL 173284

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 19, 2010

DocketED 92477

StatusPublished

This text of 304 S.W.3d 277 (State v. Wilson) 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. Wilson, 304 S.W.3d 277, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 40, 2010 WL 173284 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Van Wilson (hereinafter, “Defendant”) appeals from the trial court’s judgment after a jury found him guilty of murder in the first degree, Section 565.020 RSMo (2000), and armed criminal action, Section 571.015 RSMo (2000). The trial court sentenced Defendant to consecutive terms of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole on murder in the first degree, and life imprisonment on armed criminal action. Defendant raises three allegations of error, claiming the trial court failed to allow him to make an offer of proof, prohibited evidence regarding another person’s criminal conviction, and admitted a *278 videotaped statement that bolstered a witness’ testimony.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. No error of law appears. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. We have, however, provided 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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Van Wilson (hereinafter, “Defendant”) appeals from the trial court’s judgment after a jury found him guilty of murder in the first degree, Section 565.020 RSMo (2000), and armed criminal action, Section 571.015 RSMo (2000). The trial court sentenced Defendant to consecutive terms of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole on murder in the first degree, and life imprisonment on armed criminal action. Defendant raises three allegations of error, claiming the trial court failed to allow him to make an offer of proof, prohibited evidence regarding another person’s criminal conviction, and admitted a *278 videotaped statement that bolstered a witness’ testimony.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. No error of law appears. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. We have, however, provided 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).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

304 S.W.3d 277, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 40, 2010 WL 173284, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-wilson-moctapp-2010.