Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Darryl SANDERS, Defendant/Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2000-09-26
Citations: 27 S.W.3d 868
Docket Number: No. ED 77266
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Darryl SANDERS, Defendant/Appellant.
Judges: Before: HOFF, C.J. and CRANE, J. and CRIST, S.J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 27
Pages: 868–868

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Darryl SANDERS, Defendant/Appellant.
No. ED 77266.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five.
Sept. 26, 2000.
Rosalynn Koch, Asst. Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Adriane D. Crouse, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before: HOFF, C.J. and CRANE, J. and CRIST, S.J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Darryl Sanders (Defendant) appeals from the trial court's judgment and sentence entered after a jury verdict finding him guilty of selling a controlled substance in violation of Section 195 .211 RSMo 1994. The trial court sentenced Defendant as a prior offender to fifteen years imprisonment.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal, and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. Further, there is sufficient evidence from which a reasonable jury might have found Defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Clay, 975 S.W.2d 121, 139 (Mo. banc 1998), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1085, 119 S.Ct. 834, 142 L.Ed.2d 690 (1999). An extended opinion would have no jurisprudential purpose. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).
The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for the order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).