Case ID: sw3d_34/html/0851-01.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, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Christopher N. BRODHACKER, Defendant/Appellant.
    No. ED 77032.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
    Dec. 26, 2000.
    James C. Dowling, Fulton, for Appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Breck K. Burgess, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for Respondent.
    Before MOONEY, P.J., SIMON, J., and SULLIVAN, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Christopher N. Brodhacker (Appellant) appeals the trial court’s judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of attempting to manufacture or to produce a controlled substance in violation of Section 195.211 RSMo (1994). We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude there is sufficient evidence from which a reasonable juror might have found Appellant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Dulany, 781 S.W.2d 52, 55 (Mo. banc 1989). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).