Case ID: sw3d_326/html/0554-01.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. Ronald BURSTON, Defendant/Appellant.
    No. ED 93805.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
    Nov. 23, 2010.
    Shaun J. Mackelprang, John M. Reeves, Jefferson City, MO, for Plaintiff/Respondent.
    Edward S. Thompson, St. Louis, MO, for Defendant/Appellant.
    Before SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J., and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Ronald Burston appeals from the trial court’s judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of first-degree tampering. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court committed no plain error. Rule 30.20; State v. Nylon, 311 S.W.3d 869, 884 (Mo.App. E.D.2010). An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to-Rule 30.25(b). 
      
      . All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P.2009, unless otherwise indicated.