Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Robert TROTTER, Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2000-02-15
Citations: 14 S.W.3d 248
Docket Number: No. ED 76157
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Robert TROTTER, Appellant.
Judges: Before: RICHARD B. TEITELMAN, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J., and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 14
Pages: 248–249

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Robert TROTTER, Appellant.
No. ED 76157.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
Feb. 15, 2000.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied March 27, 2000.
Application for Transfer Denied April 25, 2000.
Rosalynn Koch, Asst. Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Kristin M. Frazier, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before: RICHARD B. TEITELMAN, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J., and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals from the judgment entered pursuant to his jury conviction for six counts of assault in the first degree and six related counts of armed criminal action; Defendant was sentenced as a prior offender to a total of thirty-five years' imprisonment. On appeal Defendant contends there was no evidence that he drove his vehicle toward the three victims and there was insufficient evidence that he intended to kill or seriously injure any of the victims. He further seeks plain error review of a claim that his conviction for six rather than three counts of first degree assault violated his right to be free from double jeopardy.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. We find sufficient evidence from which a reasonable juror could have found Defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. No double-jeopardy violation occurred, as the record shows Defendant committed two separate sets of assaults on the victims. A written opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).