Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Reginald L. SHAW, Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2016-02-23
Citations: 482 S.W.3d 482
Docket Number: No. ED 102936
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Reginald L. SHAW, Appellant.
Judges: Before Robert G. Dowd, Jr., P.J, and Mary K. Hoff and Roy L. Richter, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 482
Pages: 482–482

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Reginald L. SHAW, Appellant.
No. ED 102936
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE.
Filed: February 23, 2016
Ellen H. Flottman, Woodrail Centre, 1000 West Nifong, Bldg. 7, Suite 100, Columbia, MO 65203, Attorney for Appellant.
Chris A. Koster, Attorney General, Col-lette E. Neuner, Asst. Attorney General, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102-Ó899, Attorneys for Respondent.
Before Robert G. Dowd, Jr., P.J, and Mary K. Hoff and Roy L. Richter, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM
Reginald Shaw ("Defendant") appeals from his conviction by a jury of one count of robbery in, the first degree, Section 569.020 RSMo 2000. Defendant' argues the trial court abused its discretion when, it overruled his objections to the prosecutor's questions of Bria Cotton about whether Montrel Williams had a gun and whether Cotton was afraid of him because the questions were irrelevant to the question of whether Defendant was guilty of the robbery and only served to bolster Cotton's credibility improperly in the eyes of the jury- ' . '
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the trial court did not abuse its discretion. An opinion reciting-the detailed facts and restating the principles of law .would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting1 forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).