Case ID: sw3d_136/html/0831-02.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. Daniel COPLIN, Appellant.
    No. ED 83215.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
    June 15, 2004.
    Craig Johnston, Assistant Public Defender, Columbia, MO, for Appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Shaun J. Mackelprang, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for Respondent.
    Before GLENN A. NORTON, P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J. and MARY K. HOFF, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Daniel Coplin appeals the judgment entered on a jury verdict finding him guilty of four counts of first-degree statutory sodomy. He argues that the trial court plainly erred in failing to intervene sua sponte and declare a mistrial or issue a curative instruction when the prosecutor made certain comments during closing argument. Coplin did not object at trial, and this issue was not presented in his motion for new trial.

We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. The judgment is affirmed under Supreme Court Rule 30.25(b).