Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Demetrius REYNOLDS, Defendant/Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2011-03-08
Citations: 332 S.W.3d 929
Docket Number: No. ED 94421
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Demetrius REYNOLDS, Defendant/Appellant.
Judges: Before GLENN A. NORTON, P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J., and GEORGE W. DRAPER III, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 332
Pages: 929–930

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Demetrius REYNOLDS, Defendant/Appellant.
No. ED 94421.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
March 8, 2011.
Shaun J. Mackelprang, Daniel N. McPherson, Jefferson City, MO, for Plaintiff/Respondent.
Maleaner R. Harvey, St. Louis, MO, for Defendant/Appellant.
Before GLENN A. NORTON, P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J., and GEORGE W. DRAPER III, J.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
ORDER
Demetrius Reynolds (hereinafter, "Defendant") appeals from the trial court's judgment after a jury found him guilty of robbery in the first degree, Section 569.020 RSMo (2000). The trial court sentenced Defendant as a persistent felony offender to a term of twenty-five years' imprisonment. Defendant raises three allegations of error, claiming the trial court failed to: (1) acquit Defendant for insufficient evidence at the close of the evidence, (2) grant a mistrial after allowing testimony of a knife, and (3) grant his motion to strike a juror and replace her with an alternate.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. No error of law appears. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion, for the use of the parties only, setting forth the reasons for our decision.
We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).