Whitaker v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Whitaker v. State

314 S.W.3d 439, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 947, 2010 WL 2730550

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided July 13, 2010·No. WD 70523·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Arthur Whitaker appeals the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 24.035. Following a guilty plea, Whitaker was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment for driving while intoxicated pursuant to §§ 577.010 and 577.023, RSMo. Whitaker claims that he was improperly sentenced as an aggravated offender because the State failed to prove that he had three prior convictions for intoxication-related traffic offenses. We affirm. Because a published opinion would have no prece-dential value, a memorandum setting forth the reasons for this order has been provided to the parties. Rule 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Arthur Whitaker appeals the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 24.035. Following a guilty plea, Whitaker was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment for driving while intoxicated pursuant to §§ 577.010 and 577.023, RSMo. Whitaker claims that he was improperly sentenced as an aggravated offender because the State failed to prove that he had three prior convictions for intoxication-related traffic offenses. We affirm. Because a published opinion would have no prece-dential value, a memorandum setting forth the reasons for this order has been provided to the parties. Rule 84.16(b).

Whitaker v. State, 314 S.W.3d 439, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 947, 2010 WL 2730550 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

314 S.W.3d 439 (Whitaker v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.