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

Case: State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Tina Marie Lavender, Appellant.
Case Number: WD53628
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-tina-marie-lavender-appellant-d53628
Official Source URL: https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=17708
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.+Tina+Marie+Lavender%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: criminal)

---
## 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. Tina Marie Lavender, Appellant.
Case Number:  No. 51382 (Consolidated with WD 53628)
Handdown Date:  08/26/1997
Appeal From:  Circuit Court of Randolph County, Hon. Channing D. Blaeuer
Counsel for Appellant:  A. Renae Adamson
Counsel for Respondent:  John Munson Morris
Opinion Summary: 
None
Citation: 
Opinion Author:  PER CURIAM
Opinion Vote:  AFFIRMED.  Smith, P.J., Berrey and Ellis, JJ., concur.
Opinion:
Order
Tina Marie Lavender appeals the judgment of convictions and sentences for voluntary manslaughter, section 
565.023 RSMo 1994, and armed criminal action, section 571.015 RSMo 1994, and the order denying her Rule 29.15 
motion after an evidentiary hearing.
Judgment of convictions and order denying Rule 29.15 motion are affirmed.  Rule 30.25(b); and Rule 84.16(b).
Separate Opinion:
None
This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.