Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

295 S.W.3d 237

State v. Atkinson

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided October 20, 2009

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 2009-10-20

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently September 2010

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2009-10-20

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2 Robert Atkinson (Defendant) appeals the trial court’s denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal on the grounds that the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Defendant took a substantial step toward the crime of enticement of a child. We affirm.

¶3 We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the trial court’s decision was supported by sufficient evidence. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.

¶4 We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

/295/sw3d/237 · .json · Public domain