ORDER

Demetrius Reynolds (hereinafter, “Defendant”) appeals from the trial court’s judgment after a jury found him guilty of robbery in the first degree, Section 569.020 RSMo (2000). The trial court sentenced Defendant as a persistent felony offender to a term of twenty-five years’ imprisonment. Defendant raises three allegations of error, claiming the trial court failed to: (1) acquit Defendant for insufficient evidence at the close of the evidence, (2) grant a mistrial after allowing testimony of a knife, and (3) grant his motion to strike a juror and replace her with an alternate.

*930 We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. No error of law appears. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion, for the use of the parties only, setting forth the reasons for our decision.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).