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

Case: State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Bobby G. Allen, AKA:  Bobby E. Allen, Appellant.
Case Number: WD53672
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District
Decision Date: Unknown
Outcome: affirmed
Practice Area: criminal-law
Canonical URL: https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/state-of-missouri-respondent-v-bobby-g-allen-aka-bobby-e-allen-appellant-d53672
Official Source URL: https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=17998
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+Respondent%2C+v.+Bobby+G.+Allen%2C+AKA%3A++Bobby+E.+Allen%2C+Appellant.&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, text: felony)

---
## Opinion

This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.
Opinion
Missouri Court of Appeals Western District
Case Style:  State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Bobby G. Allen, AKA:  Bobby E. Allen, Appellant.
Case Number:  No. 53392 (Consolidated with WD 53672)
Handdown Date:  08/19/1997
Appeal From:  Circuit Court of Jackson County, Hon. Thomas C. Clark
Counsel for Appellant:  Andrew A. Schroeder
Counsel for Respondent:  Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon and Philip M. Koppe
Opinion Summary: 
None
Citation: 
Opinion Author:  Per Curiam
Opinion Vote:  AFFIRMED.  Smith, P.J., Berrey and Ellis, JJ., concur.
Opinion:
O R D E R
Bobby G. Allen, a.k.a. Bobby E. Allen, appeals from his two convictions by jury of felony stealing over $150, 
section 570.030, RSMo 1994.  Allen was sentenced as a prior and persistent offender to two concurrent terms of ten 
years.
Judgment affirmed.  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.