Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Anthony JACKSON, Appellant; Anthony JACKSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1993-12-07
Citations: 865 S.W.2d 681
Docket Number: Nos. 59669, 61883
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Anthony JACKSON, Appellant. Anthony JACKSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before CRANDALL, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 865
Pages: 681–681

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Anthony JACKSON, Appellant. Anthony JACKSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Nos. 59669, 61883.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Dec. 7, 1993.
S. Paige Canfield, St. Louis, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay), Atty. Gen., Elizabeth L. Ziegler, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before CRANDALL, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals the denial of his Batson challenge to the State's peremptory strikes of four venirepersons after this court remanded to the trial court to determine whether said strikes were racially motivated, 865 S.W.2d 678. We find no clear error in such denial. State v. Pullen, 843 S.W.2d 360, 362—63[3] (Mo. banc 1992).
We further find no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion and affirm by summary order. Rule 30.25(b). A memorandum has been provided to the parties for their use only.