Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Curtis PHILLIPS, Defendant/Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2006-03-07
Citations: 185 S.W.3d 783
Docket Number: No. ED 86250
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Curtis PHILLIPS, Defendant/Appellant.
Judges: Before NANNETTE A. BAKER, P.J., ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J., and SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 185
Pages: 783–783

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Curtis PHILLIPS, Defendant/Appellant.
No. ED 86250.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
March 7, 2006.
Lisa M. Stroup, St. Louis, MO, for Appellant.
Deborah Daniels, Dora A. Fichter — co-counsel, Jefferson City, MO, for Respondent.
Before NANNETTE A. BAKER, P.J., ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J., and SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Curtis Phillips (Defendant) appeals from a judgment of conviction of forcible rape, kidnapping, and two counts of second-degree robbery. Defendant alleges the trial court abused its discretion in excluding certain testimony and plainly erred in failing to sua sponte intervene during certain cross-examination of Defendant. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court did not clearly abuse its discretion in sustaining the State's objection to certain testimony and did not plainly err in failing to sua sponte intervene during cross-examination of Defendant. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Criminal Procedure 30.25(b).