OTT LAW

State of Missouri, Respondent, v. David Thomas, Jr., Appellant. David Thomas, Jr., Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.

Decision date: Unknown

Parties & Roles

Appellant
David Thomas, Jr.·David Thomas, Jr., Appellant. David Thomas, Jr., Appellant, v. State of Missouri
Respondent
State of Missouri

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, Respondent, v. David Thomas, Jr., Appellant. David Thomas, Jr., Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent. Case Number: No. 68685 Handdown Date: 06/27/1997 Appeal From: Circuit Court of Cape Girardeau County, Hon. William L. Syler Counsel for Appellant: Counsel for Respondent: Opinion Summary: Citation: Opinion Author: Per Curiam Opinion Vote: AFFIRMED. Before Dowd, Jr., P.J., Reinhard, and Gaertner, JJ. Opinion:

O R D E R Appellant, David Thomas, Jr., appeals the judgment of conviction for robbery in the first degree, RSMo section 569.020 (1994), and armed criminal action, RSMo section 571.015 (1994), entered by the Circuit Court of the County of Cape Girardeau after a jury trial.(FN1) We affirm. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find the judgment is supported by sufficient evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence, and no error of law appears. As an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose, we affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b). Footnotes: 1.As defendant=s brief raises no issues regarding the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion, his appeal from that judgment is deemed abandoned. State v. Nelson, 818 S.W.2d 285, 287 (Mo.App.E.D. 1991).

Separate Opinion: 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.

Rules

Cases

Related Opinions

Cases sharing legal topics and authorities with this opinion.