Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Alvin BUTLER, Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2004-09-21
Citations: 148 S.W.3d 836
Docket Number: No. ED 83171
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Alvin BUTLER, Appellant.
Judges: Before PATRICIA L. COHEN, P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP KRANE, J., and ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 148
Pages: 836–837

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Alvin BUTLER, Appellant.
No. ED 83171.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
Sept. 21, 2004.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Nov. 4, 2004.
S. Kristina Starke, Assistant Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Evan J. Buchheim, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before PATRICIA L. COHEN, P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP KRANE, J., and ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Alvin Butler ("Defendant") appeals from the trial court's judgment entered in the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis upon his conviction by a jury of two counts of the unclassified felony of forcible sodomy. In his appeal, Defendant alleges that the trial court erred when it: (1) overruled his trial attorney's motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of all the evidence because the evidence was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Defendant "knowingly had deviate sexual intercourse with [the male victim] by the use of forcible compulsion" and (2) failed to read MAI-CR3d 300.04, at a recess taken at the close of all evidence but before the final submission of the case to the jury, and instead gave a modified instruction.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and no error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision.
We affirm pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).