Case Name: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. W.M. GILTNER, Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1997-10-28
Citations: 955 S.W.2d 585
Docket Number: No. WD 52900
Parties: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. W.M. GILTNER, Appellant.
Judges: Before HOWARD, P.J., and BRECKENRIDGE and HANNA, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 955
Pages: 585–586

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. W.M. GILTNER, Appellant.
No. WD 52900.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Oct. 28, 1997.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Nov. 25,1997.
Robert G. Duncan, Floyd A White, Jr., Kansas City, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, Philip M. Koppe, Asst. Atty. Gen., Kansas City, for Respondent.
Before HOWARD, P.J., and BRECKENRIDGE and HANNA, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM:
W.M. Giltner appeals from his jury conviction of trafficking drugs in the second degree, a class A felony under § 195.223.2(2), RSMo 1994. The trial court sentenced Mr. Giltner to a thirty-year term of imprisonment, in accordance with the jury's recommendation. On appeal, Mr. Giltner contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress the cocaine discovered in his vehicle because its discovery was the result of an unconstitutional pretextual search. As his second point on appeal, Mr. Giltner alleges that the trial court erred in submitting a jury instruction of trafficking in cocaine salts because he was charged with trafficking in cocaine base. Finally, Mr. Gilt-ner contests the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction because there was no evidence that he possessed cocaine base.
None of Mr. Giltner's points are meritorious and a published opinion would have no jurisprudential value. Therefore, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).