State v. Reynolds

332 S.W.3d 929, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 293, 2011 WL 794435

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

ORDER

Demetrius Reynolds (hereinafter, “Defendant”) appeals from the trial court’s judgment after a jury found him guilty of robbery in the first degree, Section 569.020 RSMo (2000). The trial court sentenced Defendant as a persistent felony offender to a term of twenty-five years’ imprisonment. Defendant raises three allegations of error, claiming the trial court failed to: (1) acquit Defendant for insufficient evidence at the close of the evidence, (2) grant a mistrial after allowing testimony of a knife, and (3) grant his motion to strike a juror and replace her with an alternate.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. No error of law appears. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. 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).