Case ID: sw3d_412/html/0914-01.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. Dominique JOHNSON, Defendant/Appellant.
    No. ED 98447.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
    Nov. 5, 2013.
    Edward Thompson, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
    Karen Kramer, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
    Before LISA S. VAN AMBURG, P.J., PATRICIA L. COHEN, J., and GARY M. GAERTNER, JR.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Dominique Johnson appeals from the judgment entered upon a jury’s verdict convicting him of first-degree robbery, section 569.020, RSMo (2000), and armed criminal action, section 571.015, RSMo (2000). On appeal, Johnson contends the trial court plainly erred in failing to: (1) redact from the evidence submitted to the jury references to an additional robbery in a tape of the police interrogation of Defendant and (2) read Jury Instructions Nos. 1 and 2 at the commencement of trial. We find no plain error and affirm.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).