Case ID: sw3d_202/html/0098-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Arlando HILL, Appellant.
    No. ED 86843.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
    Oct. 3, 2006.
    Gwenda R. Robinson, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Cecily L. Daller, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
    Before ROY L. RICHTER, P.J., ROBERT G. DOWD, Jr., J., and SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Arlando Hill appeals the trial court’s judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of tampering in the first degree and resisting a lawful stop. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).