State v. Castro, WD 75878.

• Decision Date: 14 January 2014
• Docket Number: No. WD 75878.,WD 75878.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
• Parties: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Hector C. CASTRO, Appellant.

417 S.W.3d 390

STATE of Missouri, Respondent,
v.
Hector C. CASTRO, Appellant.

No. WD 75878.

Missouri Court of Appeals,
Western District.

Jan. 14, 2014.

Andrew C. Hooper, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.

Daniel E. Hunt, Jefferson City, MO, for appellant.

Before Division Three: KAREN KING MITCHELL, Presiding Judge, LISA WHITE HARDWICK, Judge and GARY D. WITT, Judge.

GARY D. WITT, Judge.

This is an appeal from a felony conviction in a court-tried case. In March of 2006, Hector C. Castro (“Castro”) was charged with felony possession of a controlled substance (cocaine) in violation of section 195.202 (RSMo Supp.2006). Because this appeal is moot, we must dismiss.

Castro initially pled guilty, received a suspended imposition of sentence and was ordered to serve five years of supervised probation. In June of 2011, Castro filed a motion to set aside his plea of guilty. In July of 2011, Castro successfully completed the five-year probation period. Shortly thereafter, Castro was allowed to withdraw his guilty plea and requested a jury trial. Castro subsequently waived his right to a jury trial and a bench trial occurred. The Circuit Court of Cole

[417 S.W.3d 391]

County found Castro guilty of possession of a controlled substance and sentenced him to pay a fine of $100. Castro voluntarily paid the fine in full the day after he was sentenced and then filed his notice of appeal one week later.

Castro alleges one point of error based on the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence found during a search of his person and on the overruling of his objections to that same evidence at trial. The State argues that we cannot reach the issue presented because the appeal is moot. The legal file indicates that, following his conviction, Castro paid the fine without first protecting his right to appeal.

Before we proceed to the merits of Castro's arguments, we must first determine sua sponte if we have authority to review the issue presented. Westcott v. State, 361 S.W.3d 468, 471–472 (Mo.App.W.D.2012) (citations omitted). Pursuant to State v. Welch, an appeal must be dismissed in a criminal case in which the sentence consists solely of the payment of a fine and court costs, where the defendant voluntarily pays the fine before taking some steps to protect his right to appeal. 701 S.W.2d 770, 771 (Mo.App.E.D.1985). “Under these circumstances, the state is no longer an interested party and the issues are moot.” Id. In order to preserve any issue for appeal in...