Legal Opinion
State v. Prock
Missouri Court of Appeals
Decided February 13, 1979No. 10564PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FRANK CONLEY, Special Judge.
Defendant was charged by information with the sale of a salt of amphetamine, a Schedule III controlled substance. Sections 195.017-6.(2)(a), 195.020 RSMo (Supp. 1975). After a trial by jury, defendant was found guilty and sentenced to a term of six years’ imprisonment.
At the trial, defendant did not contest the fact that a sale had been made. Rather, defendant relied upon the defense of entrapment. Briefly stated, the state’s evidence on this issue consisted primarily of the testimony of one Donald Potter, a paid informant. Potter testified that he first met…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Alford v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Smith v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- State v. LangSupreme Court of Missouri · 1974
- State v. BurrMissouri Court of Appeals · 1976
- State v. PageSupreme Court of Missouri · 1965
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. GibbonsSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1987
- State v. HortonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1980
- State v. WilsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1981