State v. Klaus
| Decision Date | 10 December 2002 |
| Docket Number | No. ED 80977.,ED 80977. |
| Citation | 91 S.W.3d 706 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Timothy KLAUS, Appellant. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Albert C. Lowes, Cape Girardeau, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Nicole E. Gorovsky, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Timothy Klaus ("Defendant") appeals the judgment entered upon his conviction for child molestation in the first degree, section 566.067 RSMo 2000, pursuant to his guilty plea. Defendant claims the trial court erred in failing to consider probation due to an erroneous presentence investigation report indicating he was ineligible for probation and in allowing the victim's father to give a victim impact statement. We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
In a direct appeal of a judgment and sentence entered as a result of a guilty plea, our review is restricted to the subject-matter jurisdiction of the trial court and the sufficiency of the information or indictment. State v. Sparks, 916 S.W.2d 234, 236 (Mo.App.1995). Challenges to the legality of the sentence imposed may be considered only in response to a Rule 24.035 motion. State v. Sharp, 39 S.W.3d 70, 72 (Mo.App.2001). Because Defendant does not challenge either the jurisdiction of the trial court or the sufficiency of the indictment, his appeal must be and is hereby dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Knox
...addressing the direct appeal of a case in which the defendant did not seek to set aside his or her plea. See, e.g., State v. Klaus , 91 S.W.3d 706, (Mo. App. E.D. 2002) ; State v. Cooper , 501 S.W.3d 492 (Mo. App. W.D. 2016). To determine the authority of this Court to hear this direct appe......
-
State v. Hopkins
...the sufficiency of the information or indictment.’ ” State v. Onate, 398 S.W.3d 102, 105 (Mo.App.W.D.2013) (quoting State v. Klaus, 91 S.W.3d 706, 706 (Mo.App.E.D.2002)); see also State v. Craig, 287 S.W.3d 676, 679 (Mo. banc 2009). Rule 24.035 creates an exception to the general rule that ......
-
State v. Russell
...challenge to evidentiary ruling made during sentencing hearing not cognizable on direct appeal after guilty plea); State v. Klaus, 91 S.W.3d 706 (Mo. App. E.D. 2002)(holding claim that trial court erred in failing to consider probation not cognizable on direct appeal after guilty plea); Sta......
-
State v. Hopkins, WD76128
...sufficiency of the information or indictment.'" State v. Onate, 398 S.W.3d 102, 105 (Mo. App. W.D. 2013) (quoting State v. Klaus, 91 S.W.3d 706, 706 (Mo. App. E.D. 2002)); see also State v. Craig, 287 S.W.3d 676, 679 (Mo. banc 2009). Rule 24.035 creates an exception to the general rule that......