Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Alfred L. SHANNON, III, Defendant-Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2004-03-16
Citations: 129 S.W.3d 445
Docket Number: No. ED 83051
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Alfred L. SHANNON, III, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, P.J., WILLIAM H. CRANDALL, JR., and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 129
Pages: 445–446

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Alfred L. SHANNON, III, Defendant-Appellant.
No. ED 83051.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
March 16, 2004.
Ellen H. Flottman, Columbia, MO, for appellant.
Timothy J. Lemen, Clayton, MO, for respondent.
Before CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, P.J., WILLIAM H. CRANDALL, JR., and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
The defendant, Alfred L. Shannon, III, appeals the judgment entered upon his conviction by a jury for third-degree domestic assault, Section 565.074 RSMo. (2000). In his sole point on appeal, the defendant claims the trial court plainly erred in limiting his cross-examination of the State's witness, Anne Shannon, the defendant's estranged wife.
We have reviewed the parties' briefs and the record on appeal. The defendant's claim that the trial court improperly restricted cross-examination does not facially establish substantial grounds for believing that manifest injustice or a miscarriage of justice has resulted. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties, however, have been furnished with a memorandum, for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order.
We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).