Case ID: sw3d_331/html/0720-01.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, Respondent, v. Arthur MONK, Appellant.
    No. WD 72130.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
    Feb. 22, 2011.
    Ellen H. Flottman, Columbia, MO, for appellant.
    Shaun J. Mackelprang and Daniel N. McPherson, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
    Before Division Three: CYNTHIA L. MARTIN, Presiding Judge, JAMES E. WELSH, Judge and GARY D. WITT, Judge.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Arthur Monk appeals from the trial court’s judgment convicting him of robbery in the second degree after a bench trial. Monk contends that the trial court plainly erred in allowing Monk to represent himself because his waiver of counsel was not voluntary, unequivocal, knowing, and intelligent. In particular, Monk asserts that the trial court failed to determine whether Monk understood the nature of the charges asserted against him and his potential defenses. We affirm. Rule 30.25(b).