Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Samuel MAYWEATHER, Appellant; Samuel MAYWEATHER, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1993-12-07
Citations: 865 S.W.2d 677
Docket Number: Nos. 58840, 61664
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Samuel MAYWEATHER, Appellant. Samuel MAYWEATHER, 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: 677–678

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Samuel MAYWEATHER, Appellant. Samuel MAYWEATHER, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Nos. 58840, 61664.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Dec. 7, 1993.
S. Paige Canfield, St. Louis, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Jeffi-fer A. Glancy, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before CRANDALL, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDÉR
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 672. 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.