Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Adrian SHAW, Appellant.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2019-03-05
Citations: 578 S.W.3d 823
Docket Number: No. ED 106019
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Respondent,
v.
Adrian SHAW, Appellant.
Judges: Before Philip M. Hess, P.J., Robert G. Dowd, Jr., J. and Mary K. Hoff, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 578
Pages: 823–824

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Respondent,
v.
Adrian SHAW, Appellant.
No. ED 106019
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.
Filed: March 5, 2019
FOR APPELLANT: Kevin B. Gau, Missouri Public Defender's Office, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, Missouri 63101.
FOR RESPONDENT: Dora A. Fichter, Assistant Attorney General, PO Box 899, Jefferson City, Missouri 65102.
Before Philip M. Hess, P.J., Robert G. Dowd, Jr., J. and Mary K. Hoff, J.
ORDER

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Adrian Darcy Shaw ("Defendant") was convicted by jury of statutory sodomy in the first degree. The trial court conducted a hearing, prior to trial, outside the presence of the jury to determine the admissibility of out-of-court statements by a child declarant regarding the alleged sexual offenses. In his sole point on appeal, Defendant alleges the trial court erred in allowing four witnesses to testify at trial to out-of-court statements by the alleged child victim because the time, content and circumstances of the statements did not provide sufficient indicia of reliability as required by statute. We find no error and affirm.
An extended opinion would have no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment of the trial court pursuant to Rule 30.25(b) Mo.R.Crim. P. (2019).