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

Case: State of Missouri, Respondent v. Montez Riley, 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-montez-riley-appellant-13508
Official Source URL: https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=13508
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+v.+Montez+Riley%2C+Appellant&ott_archive_link_source=tag&ott_archive_link_score=24&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: 24; 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, Respondent v. Montez Riley, Appellant
Case Number:  73462
Handdown Date:  07/31/1998
Appeal From:  Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Hon. Larry L. Kendrick
Counsel for Appellant:  Gary E. Brotherton
Counsel for Respondent:  John Munson Morris and Karen L. Kramer
Opinion Summary: 
None
Citation: 
Opinion Author:  PER CURIAM
Opinion Vote:  AFFIRMED.  Hoff, P.J., Gaertner and Russell, J.J. concur
Opinion:
ORDER
Defendant appeals from the judgment entered on a jury verdict finding him guilty of second degree robbery in 
violation of section 569.030 RSMo 1994.  Due to his status as a prior and persistent offender, defendant was sentenced to 
twelve years imprisonment.
No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the 
principles of law.  However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting 
forth the facts and reasons for this order.
We affirm 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.