OTT LAW

State of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Roger Addison, Defendant-Appellant.

Decision date: Unknown

Parties & Roles

Appellant
Roger Addison, Defendant-
Respondent
State of Missouri, Plaintiff-

Disposition

Affirmed

Slip Opinion Notice

This archive contains Missouri appellate slip opinions reproduced for research convenience, not the final official reporter version. Official source links remain authoritative where provided. Joseph Ott, Attorney 67889, Ott Law Firm - Constant Victory - Personal Injury and Litigation maintains these public legal archives to support Missouri case research and to help prospective clients connect that research to the firm's courtroom practice.

Opinion

This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court. Opinion Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District Case Style: State of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Roger Addison, Defendant-Appellant. Case Number: 71557 Handdown Date: 12/02/1997 Appeal From: Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, Hon. Timothy J. Wilson Counsel for Appellant: Deborah B. Wafer, Nancy L. Vincent Counsel for Respondent: John M. Morris, Meghan J. Stephens Opinion Summary: None Citation: Opinion Author: Per Curiam Opinion Vote: AFFIRMED. Dowd, Jr., P.J., Simon, Hoff, JJ. Opinion: Roger Addison ("Defendant") appeals from judgment entered on a jury verdict finding him guilty of two counts of robbery in the first degree in violation of Section 569.020, RSMo 1994, and two counts of armed criminal action in violation of Section 571.015, RSMo, 1994 . He was sentenced to terms of ten years on each count with Counts I and II to be served concurrently and Counts III and IV to be served concurrently, but consecutively to Counts I and II, for a total of twenty years. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b). Separate Opinion: None

This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.

Authorities Cited

Statutes, rules, and cases referenced in this opinion.

Statutes

Rules

Related Opinions

Cases sharing legal topics and authorities with this opinion.