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

Case: State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Ronnie Lee Taylor, Defendant/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-ronnie-lee-taylor-defendantappellant-13491
Official Source URL: https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=13491
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.+Ronnie+Lee+Taylor%2C+Defendant%2FAppellant.&ott_archive_link_source=tag&ott_archive_link_score=30&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: 30; 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. Ronnie Lee Taylor, Defendant/Appellant.
Case Number:  73424
Handdown Date:  06/30/1998
Appeal From:  Circuit Court of Pike County, Hon. J. Rockne Calhoun
Counsel for Appellant:  E. Rex Bradley
Counsel for Respondent:  Mark S. Fisher
Opinion Summary: 
None
Citation: 
Opinion Author:  PER CURIAM
Opinion Vote:  AFFIRMED.  Ahrens, P.J., Crandall, Jr., and Rhodes Russell, J.J., concur.
Opinion:
ORDER
Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction, after a bench trial, of driving while intoxicated in violation of 
section 577.010 RSMo 1994.  Because defendant had previously pled guilty to driving while intoxicated, he was charged 
as a prior offender pursuant to section 577.023.2 RSMo 1994.  The trial court found defendant guilty and sentenced him to 
one year in the county jail, with a suspended execution of sentence on all but the first thirty days of the sentence.
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 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.