State v. Horton

182 S.W.3d 661, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1843, 2005 WL 3384720

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Calvin Horton (“Defendant”) appeals the judgment entered upon his convictions by a jury for robbery in the first degree and armed criminal action. The trial court sentenced him to ten years imprisonment on the first degree robbery charge and seven years imprisonment on the armed criminal action charge. The court ordered the sentences to be served consecutively.

In his sole point on appeal Defendant claims the trial court plainly erred when it refused to inform the jury that defendant would have to serve a minimum prison term of eighty-five percent of his sentence before he could be considered for parole. Defendant argues that in a bifurcated trial, the jury should be informed of the minimum term of prison that must be served before a defendant is eligible for parole. We find no error and affirm.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, which sets forth the facts and reasons for this order.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).