Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Sheila GARCIA, Appellant.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2018-09-18
Citations: 561 S.W.3d 856
Docket Number: No. ED 105599
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Respondent,
v.
Sheila GARCIA, Appellant.
Judges: Before Kurt S. Odenwald, P.J., Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., J., and Colleen Dolan, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 561
Pages: 856–856

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Respondent,
v.
Sheila GARCIA, Appellant.
No. ED 105599
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR.
FILED: September 18, 2018
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied October 22, 2018
Application for Transfer Denied December 18, 2018
Matthew J. Bell, 1010 Market St., Suite 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101, for appellant.
Joshua D. Hawley, Garrick Aplin, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102-+, for respondent.
Before Kurt S. Odenwald, P.J., Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., J., and Colleen Dolan, J.
ORDER

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
The State charged Sheila Garcia ("Garcia") with one count of unlawful possession of a firearm after an officer seized a revolver and Garcia's identification from a vacant building. The trial court denied Garcia's motion to suppress the revolver as evidence. At the instruction stage, the trial court refused Garcia's request for Missouri Approved Instructions-Criminal § 310.06 (1987) ("MAI-CR 310.06"). Garcia challenges these rulings on appeal. Because Garcia lacked standing to challenge the officer's search and seizure of the revolver and was not prejudiced by the trial court's refusal to deliver the jury instruction offered by Garcia, we affirm the trial court's judgment.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).