Ott Law Firm Agent-Safe Plain Text
Official source remains authoritative.

Case: State of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Sandy Johnson, Defendant/Respondent.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
Decision Date: Unknown
Outcome: affirmed
Practice Area: criminal-law
Canonical URL: https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/state-of-missouri-plaintiffrespondent-v-sandy-johnson-defendantrespondent-12672
Official Source URL: https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=12672
Related Practice Areas:
- Criminal Law: https://ott.law/practice-areas/criminal-law?ott_archive=missouri-courts&ott_archive_practice_area=criminal-law&ott_archive_query=State+of+Missouri%2C+Plaintiff%2FRespondent%2C+v.+Sandy+Johnson%2C+Defendant%2FRespondent.&ott_archive_link_source=tag&ott_archive_link_score=26&ott_archive_link_evidence=tag%3A+criminal-law%3B+text%3A+state+of+missouri&ott_archive_location=opinion_plain_text_practice_area (slug: criminal-law; source: tag; score: 26; evidence: tag: criminal-law, text: state of missouri)

---
## 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. Sandy Johnson, Defendant/Respondent.
Case Number:  71567
Handdown Date:  12/16/1997
Appeal From:  Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, Hon. Floyd McBride, Jr.
Counsel for Appellant:  David R. Truman
Counsel for Respondent:  Beverly Beimdieck and Jan Shelly
Opinion Summary: 
None
Citation: 
Opinion Author:  PER CURIAM
Opinion Vote:  AFFIRMED.  Crane, P.J., Rhodes Russell and James R. Dowd, J.J., concur.
Opinion:
ORDER
The State of Missouri appeals, pursuant to Section 547.200.2 RSMo 1994,  from the trial court's decision to grant 
defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal notwithstanding the verdict.  The trial court's judgment was entered after a 
jury found respondent guilty of sale of a controlled substance, Section 195.211 RSMo 1994.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no jurisprudential purpose would be 
served by a written opinion.  We affirm the judgment pursuant to 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.