Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. James E. CHAPMAN, Defendant/Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2008-01-15
Citations: 243 S.W.3d 491
Docket Number: No. ED 88377
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. James E. CHAPMAN, Defendant/Appellant.
Judges: Before MARY K. HOFF, P.J., SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J., and GEORGE W. DRAPER III, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 243
Pages: 491–492

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. James E. CHAPMAN, Defendant/Appellant.
No. ED 88377.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
Jan. 15, 2008.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Cory Lee Atkins, Jefferson City, MO, for plaintiff/respondent.
Michelle M. Rivera, Saint Louis, MO, for defendant/appellant.
Before MARY K. HOFF, P.J., SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J., and GEORGE W. DRAPER III, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Defendant, James E. Chapman, appeals from his convictions of forcible sodomy, assault in the second degree, armed criminal action, kidnapping, and attempted forcible sodomy. Defendant contends the trial court erred in allowing the State to present evidence of the victim's condition after the alleged sexual offense.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude there is no error of law. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Criminal Procedure 30.25(b).