Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Leo N. HOLLIDAY, Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2003-09-16
Citations: 116 S.W.3d 699
Docket Number: No. ED 81512
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Leo N. HOLLIDAY, Appellant.
Judges: Before CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, P.J., WILLIAM H. CRANDALL JR., J. and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 116
Pages: 699–699

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Leo N. HOLLIDAY, Appellant.
No. ED 81512.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
Sept. 16, 2003.
Kent Denzel, Columbia, MO, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Patrick T. Morgan, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, P.J., WILLIAM H. CRANDALL JR., J. and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Leo N. Holliday ("Holliday") appeals the judgment on his conviction of one count of receiving stolen property in violation of section 570.080 RSMo (2000) and one count of possession of a controlled substance in violation of section 195.202. Holliday claims that the trial court erred in overruling his motion for judgment of acquittal because the state failed to present sufficient evidence to convict him of either crime.
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 opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).