Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

169 S.W.3d 927

State v. Draper

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided September 6, 2005

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 2005-09-06

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently June 2016

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2005-09-06

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2 Timothy Draper appeals his conviction following jury trial for the class B felony of committing violence against an offender, section 217.385, RSMo 2000, and sentence of five years imprisonment. Mr. Draper raises one point on appeal. He contends that the trial court erred in allowing Cynthia Rushefsky’s testimony regarding a possible motive for Mr. Draper’s actions because there was no evidence Mr. Draper had any knowledge of the facts constituting the motive to which Ms. Rushefsky testified and thus the testimony was irrelevant. The judgment of conviction is affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).

/169/sw3d/927 · .json · Public domain