State v. Fender, s. WD

Decision Date09 June 1980
Docket NumberNos. WD,s. WD
Citation600 S.W.2d 683
PartiesSTATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Ricky Lynn FENDER, Appellant. STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Ricky DAVIS, Appellant. 31224, 31223.
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

Jefferson G. Broady, Rock Port, for appellants.

Henry C. Copeland, Pros. Atty. of Atchison County, Rock Port, for respondent.

Before TURNAGE, P. J., and SHANGLER and MANFORD, JJ.

TURNAGE, Presiding Judge.

These cases present a common problem and have been consolidated in this court. Fender and Davis were each charged by uniform traffic ticket conforming to Rule 37.1162 with resisting arrest by flight. Both tickets were issued in July, 1979, but on different days. Fender appeared by attorney, entered a plea of guilty and received a sentence of 30 days in jail. Davis appeared pro se, entered a plea of guilty and received a like sentence of 30 days. On this appeal both contend the information in the form of a uniform traffic ticket was insufficient to charge the crime of resisting arrest as proscribed by § 575.150, RSMo 1978. 1

Although neither party has questioned the jurisdiction of this court over these appeals, it is the duty of this court to inquire sua sponte into its jurisdiction. Marsch v. Williams, 575 S.W.2d 897, 898(1) (Mo.App.1978). Finding no jurisdiction vested in this court, both appeals are dismissed.

The only record on appeal filed here consists of a number of documents stipulated by the parties to be certified copies of the pleadings and court records. From these documents it is apparent the proceedings were not on the record in either case.

It does appear that each traffic ticket was filed with Division II of the Circuit Court of Atchison County, and Fender and Davis each pleaded guilty before the Honorable Donald E. Reynolds, an associate circuit judge. It is obvious that it was intended to charge Fender and Davis each with the commission of a misdemeanor before the associate circuit judge under the provisions of Art. 5, Sec. 27.2a, Constitution of Missouri, effective January 2, 1979, which transferred magistrate court jurisdiction to the circuit courts. It is further apparent that the associate circuit judge exercised jurisdiction over these charges under Art. 5, Sec. 27.3, which provides that until otherwise provided by law, associate circuit judges shall hear all cases on matters, civil and criminal, previously provided by law for magistrates. Of course, under the previous Art. 5, and applicable laws, these charges would have been filed before the magistrate. Because the charges were considered to be misdemeanors they were properly filed with the associate circuit judge who was exercising the same jurisdiction as previously enjoyed by magistrates.

The question now becomes whether or not an appeal to this court is permitted from the judgment and sentence entered by the associate circuit judge on misdemeanor charges filed directly with him. Section 543.290 provides:

"1. Any person convicted before an associate circuit judge for any misdemeanor or infraction may have a trial de novo if the cause was not tried before a jury upon the record or before the judge upon the record by special assignment or transfer, . . . ."

As noted, these cases were not heard on the record, nor by a jury, or by special assignment to the associate circuit judge. Section 543.300 provides that upon a request for a trial de novo being perfected the cause shall be assigned for a trial de novo before a circuit or associate circuit judge. Section 543.335 in part provides:

"In any case tried with a jury before an associate circuit judge or on assignment under procedures applicable before circuit judges, a record shall be kept and any person aggrieved by a judgment rendered in any such case may have an appeal upon that record to the appropriate appellate court."

Rule 30.33 provides that § 543.335, among others, shall govern the procedures and requests for trial de novo or appeals in criminal proceedings pending before...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • State v. Coor, 14888
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 26 Octubre 1987
    ...jurisdiction exists before we consider the appeal on its merits. State v. Garrett, 642 S.W.2d 378 (Mo.App.1982); State v. Fender, 600 S.W.2d 683, 685 (Mo.App.1980); State v. Barton, 567 S.W.2d 460 (Mo.App.1978). In this case, the question of appellate jurisdiction is almost as complicated a......
  • State v. O'Neal
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 30 Diciembre 1981
    ...564 S.W.2d 940, 942 (Mo.App.1978). Also see State v. Arnold, 419 S.W.2d 59 (Mo.1967); State v. Zito, supra, n. 2.4 In State v. Fender, 600 S.W.2d 683 (Mo.App.1980) it was held that when a plea of guilty is entered in the associate division of the circuit court not on the record, an appeal d......
  • State v. Henderson
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 29 Marzo 1988
    ...to a direct appeal after the entry of a plea of guilty before an associate circuit judge, citing this court's opinion in State v. Fender, 600 S.W.2d 683 (Mo.App.1980). Respondent's argument has no merit for two reasons: First, Fender was based upon §§ 543.290, 543.300, and 543.335, RSMo 197......
  • Cochran v. State, WD
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 25 Agosto 1992
    ...the Court of Appeals itself--whose duty it is at the threshold of every case, sua sponte, to examine its jurisdiction, State v. Fender, 600 S.W.2d 683 (Mo.App.1980), decided the evidence suppression case on its merits without questioning its jurisdiction to do Second, the original appellate......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT