Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

136 S.W.3d 114

State v. Rhodes

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided May 18, 2004

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 2004-05-18

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently May 2007

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2004-05-18

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2Bobby Rhodes (“defendant”) appeals the judgment on his conviction of possession of a controlled substance with the intent to deliver, in violation of section 195.211 RSMo (Cum.Supp.2002). Defendant claims that the trial court erred in failing to declare a mistrial on its own motion, and the trial court erred in denying defendant’s motions for judgment of acquittal and for a new trial because there was insufficient evidence to support the conviction. Defendant also claims that the trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion to suppress evidence.

¶3We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

¶4The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).

/136/sw3d/114 · .json · Public domain