Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Perry R. WOODS, Defendant/Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2005-05-03
Citations: 163 S.W.3d 493
Docket Number: No. ED 84609
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Perry R. WOODS, Defendant/Appellant.
Judges: Before GARY M. GAERTNER, SR., P.J., SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J., and BOOKER T. SHAW, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 163
Pages: 493–494

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Perry R. WOODS, Defendant/Appellant.
No. ED 84609.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
May 3, 2005.
Kent Denzel, Columbia, Missouri, for Appellant.
Deborah Daniels, Shaun J. Maekel-prang, co-counsel, Jefferson City, Missouri, for Respondent.
Before GARY M. GAERTNER, SR., P.J., SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J., and BOOKER T. SHAW, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Perry R. Woods (Defendant) appeals from a judgment of conviction of stealing. Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that sufficient evidence existed for a reasonable jury to find Defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of stealing. State v. Shinn, 921 S.W.2d 70, 72-73 (Mo.App. E.D.1996). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Criminal Procedure 30.25(b).