Legal Opinion

State v. Cummings

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided February 8, 1989No. 15144PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOGAN, Judge.

A jury has found defendant Freddie Cummings guilty of receiving stolen property, more specifically, retaining stolen property, in violation of § 570.080, RSMo 1978. Defendant was found to be a persistent offender and his punishment was assessed at imprisonment for a term of seven (7) years. The defendant appeals. We affirm.

The sufficiency of the evidence to support the judgment of conviction is not at issue, although the sufficiency question was carefully preserved upon trial. Inasmuch as this appeal is the defendant’s appeal of constitutional right, Ross v. Moffitt, 417 U.S.…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Illinois v. GatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. United States v. LeonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  3. Aguilar v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  4. Spinelli v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  5. Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State v. HudsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1991
  2. State v. DuckettMissouri Court of Appeals · 1993
  3. State v. NorfolkMissouri Court of Appeals · 1990
  4. State v. RichardsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1990
  5. Plant v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1989

1 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