Case ID: sw3d_73/html/0025-02.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, Respondent, v. Arthur WEIL, Appellant.
    No. WD 59395.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
    March 5, 2002.
    Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied April 30, 2002.
    Emmett D. Queener, Asst. Public Defender, Columbia, MO, for appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Dora A. Fichter, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
    Before BRECKENRIDGE, P.J., NEWTON and HARDWICK, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On October 4, 2000, a jury convicted Arthur Weil of the class A felony of robbery in the first degree, § 569.020, RSMo 2000. The court sentenced Mr. Weil, as a prior offender, to twenty-five years imprisonment. On appeal, Mr. Weil asserts that the court erred when it overruled his objection to jury instruction number five since there was a variance between the instruction and the amended information. This court finds that the variance was not material, and Mr. Weil did not suffer prejudice because of the variance. Since a published opinion would have no prece-dential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).