Case ID: sw3d_484/html/0822-01.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. Joe REED, Appellant.
    No. ED100510
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION THREE.
    Filed: February 2, 2016
    Matthew William Huckeby, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, Missouri 63101, for Appellant.
    Chris Koster, Attorney General, Karen Louise Kramer, Assistant Attorney General, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, Missouri 65102, for Respondent.
    Before Robert M. Clayton III, P.J., Lawrence E. Mooney, J., and James M. Dowd, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM

Joe Reed appeals his convictions following a jury trial in the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis of two counts of first-degree robbery and two counts of armed criminal action. In his three points on appeal, Reed contends that the trial court plainly erred (1) by excluding the public from a portion of his trial after a juror expressed fear due to the presence in the courtroom of members of Reed’s family and his former co-defendant; (2) by failing to sua sponte declare a mistrial due to the juror’s concerns; and (3) by overruling Reed’s motion to suppress evidence identifying Reed as a suspect in the crimes. We affirm.

The judgment of the trial court is based on findings of fact that are not plainly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).