Legal Opinion

State v. Durham

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided April 8, 1963No. 49699PublishedCited by 54 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STOCKARD, Commissioner.

Defendant was convicted of burglary in the second degree and of stealing, and he was sentenced under the habitual criminal act to imprisonment for eight years for the burglary and to four years for the stealing, the terms to be served consecutively. Defendant has filed no brief in this court as appellant. He has filed pro se what he denominates to be a “reply” to the brief filed by the State as respondent. In the motion for new trial defendant asserts that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict, that the court erred in overruling his motion to suppress…

Also in this document: Per curiam.

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. State v. HeppermanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1942
  2. State v. WatsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1961
  3. State v. WhitakerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1955
  4. State v. DenisonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1944
  5. State v. McKeeverSupreme Court of Missouri · 1936

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by54 opinions

  1. State v. CobbSupreme Court of Missouri · 1969
  2. State v. HolbertSupreme Court of Missouri · 1967
  3. State v. SalleeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1969
  4. State v. WitherspoonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1970
  5. Anderson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1970

49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API