Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Timothy W. HEMPFLING, Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2002-06-28
Citations: 83 S.W.3d 654
Docket Number: No. ED 79686
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Timothy W. HEMPFLING, Appellant.
Judges: Before SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, P.J., LAWRENCE G. CRAHAN, J., and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 83
Pages: 654–654

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Timothy W. HEMPFLING, Appellant.
No. ED 79686.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
June 28, 2002.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Aug. 7, 2002.
Application for Transfer Denied Sept. 24, 2002.
David C. Hemingway, Assistant Public Defender’s Office, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
John Munson Morris, III, Karen L. Kramer, Assistant Attorney General’s Office, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, P.J., LAWRENCE G. CRAHAN, J., and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Timothy W. Hempfling (Appellant) appeals from the trial court's Order and Judgment (Judgment) denying his Motion for Acquittal or New Trial (Motion) under Rules 27.07 and 29.11. Appellant asserts that the trial court erred and, subsequently, he was denied the right to a fair trial. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court's Judgment is not clearly erroneous. 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) (2002).
. All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P.2001, unless otherwise indicated.