State v. Young, 280 S.W.3d 111 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009). · Go Syfert
Search
State v. Young, 280 S.W.3d 111 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
green Positive treatment 0 red 0 yellow 2 green 0 procedural ▼
Sample citers
Cited State of Missouri v. Melvin Huffman
2014-06-17 · phrase: "see"
"…See id. (no prejudice in failing to sua sponte declare mistrial based on unanswered question where jury instructed that questions are not evidence); see also State v. Lloyd, 205 S.W.3d 893, 908 (Mo.App.S.D.2006) (same)."
Cited State v. Salazar
2013-10-02 · phrase: "see"
"…See Stone, 280 S.W.3d at 116 ."
Syfertize v1: red = negative treatment, yellow = caution, green = positive treatment, procedural = cert/review/rehearing denied (no substantive interpretation). Flag is the strongest substantive signal across all citers; counts show the breakdown.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE of Missouri
v.
Darnell YOUNG
No. ED 91052.
Missouri Court of Appeals.
Feb 3, 2009.
Published opinion
280 S.W.3d 111
2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 83
2009 WL 242340
Scott Rosenblum, Brocea Smith, Clayton, MO, for appellant., Chris Koster, Atty. Gen., Evan J. Buch-heim, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
III, Mooney, Richter.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Darnell Young appeals the judgment entered upon his convictions by a jury for forcible rape, Section 566.030 RSMo 2000; and incest, Section 568.020 RSMo 2000. An opinion would have no precedential value. We have furnished the parties with a memorandum, for their information only, setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm. Rule 30.25(b).