State v. LePage
| Decision Date | 29 March 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. KCD,KCD |
| Citation | 536 S.W.2d 834 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Ron LePAGE, Appellant. 27513. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Hendren & Andrae, Alex Bartlett, Jefferson City, for appellant.
John C. Danforth, Atty. Gen., Robert L. Presson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before TURNAGE, P.J., and WELBORN and HIGGINS, Special Judges.
Defendant pleaded guilty to a two-count information of selling marijuana and methamphetamine. Following his plea the court assessed punishment at five years on each count. Defendant has filed a direct appeal.
The defendant was charged in the circuit court after a petition had been filed in the juvenile court alleging the charges here in question were committed by defendant prior to the time he reached seventeen years of age. Defendant was represented by counsel in the juvenile court. Following a hearing in juvenile court, the court made findings of fact and reached the conclusion the defendant was not a proper subject to be dealt with under the Juvenile Code, Sections 211.011 to 211.431, RSMo 1969. The juvenile court ordered the petition filed in that court dismissed and further ordered that defendant could be prosecuted under the general law.
Thereupon the defendant was charged in magistrate court. The defendant appeared there by the same attorney who represented him in the juvenile proceedings and waived his preliminary hearing and was bound over to circuit court.
Defendant thereafter appeared in circuit court with his same attorney. After being advised the defendant would enter a plea of guilty, the court conducted a hearing to determine the voluntariness of the plea. The court concluded the plea was entered voluntarily and accepted the same. The court ordered a pre-sentence investigation. After receiving such investigation, the defendant and his attorney appeared for sentencing. The court refused to grant probation.
On this appeal defendant seeks to attack the dismissal of the petition in juvenile court on a number of grounds with the ultimate conclusion the circuit court lacked jurisdiction because of the alleged infirmities in the juvenile court proceeding. Defendant also seeks to raise questions concerning the failure of the court to allow his attorney to examine the pre-sentence report and a question of whether one or two charges were actually involved. Finding this court does not have jurisdiction to consider the points raised, the appeal is dismissed.
The scope of review of this direct appeal following a guilty plea is restricted to the question of the jurisdiction of the subject matter and the sufficiency of the criminal charge. This was stated in Kansas City v. Stricklin, 428 S.W.2d 721, 724(8, 9) (Mo. banc 1968): 'The question of jurisdiction of the subject matter and the sufficiency of the pleadings in either a civil or criminal action may be raised at any stage of the proceedings, even after a plea of guilty, and for the first time in the appellate court.' See also Rule 28.02.
The defendant does seek to attack the jurisdiction of the circuit court because of the alleged defects in the juvenile court proceeding. However, in Jefferson v. State, 442 S.W.2d 6 (Mo.1969) this precise factual situation was presented. There the defendant had been the subject of a petition filed in the juvenile court but such petition was dismissed and the State was allowed to prosecute him under the general law. The defendant there appeared in circuit court with his attorneys and entered a plea of guilty. The court disposed of the contention there attacking the procedure in the juvenile court by stating at 442 S.W.2d 12(7): ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Hollis, KCD
...the authority of Jefferson v. State, 442 S.W.2d 6, 12(7) (Mo.1969); Ford v. State, 534 S.W.2d 111 (Mo.App.1976), and State v. LePage, 536 S.W.2d 834, 836(2) (Mo.App.1976). The defendant, however, counters by requesting that if this point is "capable of being waived" that it be considered un......
-
King v. State
...of whether the court accepting the plea had jurisdiction of the subject matter and whether the change is sufficient. State v. LePage, 536 S.W.2d 834 (Mo.App.1976); Riley v. State, 588 S.W.2d 738 (Mo.App.1979). Both cases are distinguishable from the instant case since neither involved the r......
-
State v. Yodprasit, 96-491
...juvenile or his parents of right to counsel in proceedings to certify him to adult court for criminal prosecution); State v. LePage, 536 S.W.2d 834, 835 (Mo.App.1976) (holding that juvenile waived any objections he had to juvenile court proceedings when he failed to file any motion in adult......
-
State v. O'Neal
...is restricted to the question of the jurisdiction of the subject matter and the sufficiency of the criminal charge". State v. LePage, 536 S.W.2d 834, 835 (Mo.App.1976). Also see Riley v. State, 588 S.W.2d 738 At an early date it was held there was no appeal following a plea of guilty in the......