Case ID: sw2d_932/html/0876-02.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. Samuel CRUMP, Defendant-Appellant. Samuel CRUMP, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent-Respondent.
    Nos. 68239, 70296.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
    Oct. 29, 1996.
    Gary E. Brotherton, Asst. Public Defender, Columbia, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Joanne E. Joiner, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for Plaintiff-Respondent.
    Before DOWD, P.J., and REINHARD and GARY M. GAERTNER, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from his conviction for one count of second-degree burglary, § 569.170, RSMo 1994. The trial court sentenced him as a prior and persistent offender, § 558.016, to fifteen years’ imprisonment, to run concurrently with the sentence in an unrelated case. Defendant alleges the trial court erred when it did not grant a mistrial sua sponte during closing argument after a personal attack by the prosecutor on Defendant’s attorney. Defendant also alleges error in the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion without a hearing. No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum outlining the reasons for this order affirming the judgments of the trial and motion courts. Rules 84.16(b) and 30.25(b).