Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Phillip DUNNING, Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2008-12-23
Citations: 270 S.W.3d 930
Docket Number: No. WD 68790
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Phillip DUNNING, Appellant.
Judges: Before DIVII: DANDURAND, P.J., LOWENSTEIN and SMART, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 270
Pages: 930–931

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Phillip DUNNING, Appellant.
No. WD 68790.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Dec. 23, 2008.
Frederick J. Ernst, Kansas City, MO, for appellant.
Shaun J. Mackelprang, and Mary H. Moore, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before DIVII: DANDURAND, P.J., LOWENSTEIN and SMART, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Phillip J. Dunning appeals his conviction, after a jury trial, for tampering the first degree, pursuant to Section 569.080.1(2), RSMo (2000), for which he was sentenced as a prior offender to a term of seven years. Dunning contends the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction, and that the trial court improperly admitted the testimony of a responding officer regarding the complaining witness's statement, arguing that the statements were hearsay and constituted improper bolstering.
This court finds there was sufficient evidence to establish that Dunning knew he did not have the owner's permission to take the vehicle. This court finds, further, that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the officer's statements. Dunning did not suffer any prejudice in that the complaining witness himself testified. Dunning's claim that the officer's testimony constituted improper bolstering was not preserved. Upon review for plain error, this court concludes that the officer's testimony was offered for a purpose other than corroboration and any statements that went beyond this purpose were not outcome determinative.