Case ID: sw3d_17/html/0558-02.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. Dwayne HINKLE, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. ED 75460.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
    Dec. 21, 1999.
    Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied May 17, 2000.
    David C. Hemingway, Asst. Sp. Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.
    Joyce Dee Hays, Cir. Atty., Catherine V. Fee, Asst. Cir. Atty., St. Louis, for respondent.
    Before KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., and ROBERT G. DOWD, Jr., and SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Dwayne Hinkle (Hinkle)- appeals from the judgment upon his conviction by a jury of two counts of assault in the third degree, Section 565.070, RSMo 1994, a Class A misdemeanor, for which he was sentenced to two consecutive jail sentences of 180 days. Hinkle claims the trial court plainly erred when it (1) allowed the State to produce evidence of uncharged misconduct, (2) allowed the State to argue in closing arguments that Hinkle should be convicted to prevent him from committing further crimes, and (3) allowed the case to go to the jury notwithstanding Hinkle’s ineffective assistance of counsel. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file and the transcript. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).