Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Frederic MERTELL, Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2001-12-18
Citations: 68 S.W.3d 546
Docket Number: No. ED 78808
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Frederic MERTELL, Appellant.
Judges: Before RICHARD B. TEITELMAN, GARY M. GAERTNER SR. J., and CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 68
Pages: 546–546

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Frederic MERTELL, Appellant.
No. ED 78808.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
Dec. 18, 2001.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Feb. 7, 2002.
Stacey F. Sullivan, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Shaun J. Mackelprang, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before RICHARD B. TEITELMAN, GARY M. GAERTNER SR. J., and CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Frederic Mertell ("defendant") was charged with first-degree statutory sodomy under section 566.062 RSMo 2000. A jury found defendant guilty of the charge and the court sentenced him, as a prior offender, to a fifteen-year term. Defendant appeals the verdict claiming that the trial court plainly erred in admitting testimony of the victim's paternal grandmother, in the state's case, that the defendant referred to the victim with a racial slur. Defendant claims the evidence was more prejudicial than probative. There was no objection to the testimony, and the claim was not preserved for appeal.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. We find no manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice and no plain error. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).