State v. Griffith , 237 S.W.3d 242 ( 2007 )

Order

PER CURIAM.

Brock Griffith appeals his convictions of burglary, stealing, and tampering with a motor vehicle. Griffith alleges that the trial court plainly erred by not sua sponte prohibiting the prosecuting attorney from arguing facts not in evidence during closing arguments. Because no facial plain error is evident, we do not grant plain error review.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).