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

Case: State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Herbert Bowens, Appellant.
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-respondent-v-herbert-bowens-appellant-13661
Official Source URL: https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=13661
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.+Herbert+Bowens%2C+Appellant.&ott_archive_link_source=tag&ott_archive_link_score=28&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: 28; evidence: tag: criminal-law, text: state of missouri, text: conviction)

---
## 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. Herbert Bowens, Appellant.
Case Number:  73866
Handdown Date:  10/20/1998
Appeal From:  Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Hon. William M. Corrigan
Counsel for Appellant:  David Simpson
Counsel for Respondent:  Breck K. Burgess
Opinion Summary: 
None
Citation: 
Opinion Author:  PER CURIAM
Opinion Vote:  AFFIRMED.  Pudlowski, P.J., Crandall, Jr., and Ahrens, JJ., concur.
Opinion:
ORDER
Herbert Bowens, Defendant, appeals from the judgment entered following his conviction for first degree robbery, 
first degree burglary, and armed criminal action.  We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and 
find no error of law.   An extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose.   We have, however, provided a 
memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision.  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.