State v. Malloyd
| Decision Date | 11 October 1965 |
| Docket Number | No. 2,No. 51289,51289,2 |
| Citation | 394 S.W.2d 405 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Norman MALLOYD, Appellant |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Norman H. Anderson, Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, Henry L. Twigg, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., St. Louis, for respondent.
James A. Riley, St. Louis, for appellant.
Defendant was convicted of burglary, second degree, and sentenced to imprisonment for five years, with allowance for jail time.
Appellant was represented throughout the trial, allocution and sentencing by counsel appointed by the trial court. No motion for new trial was filed, but an appeal was taken. Counsel also was appointed to represent defendant on appeal, but he has advised the clerk of this court that a brief will not be filed.
Under these circumstances, we have reviewed the record proper and those matters specified in Supreme Court Rules 28.02 and 28.08, V.A.M.R., and find no error therein. The information conforms to the statute, the verdict was proper and fixed punishment within the statutory limits, defendant was accorded allocution and the judgment was responsive to the verdict. The fact that a motion for new trial was not filed precludes us from consideration of matters required to be preserved in a motion for new trial. State v. Cook, Mo., 327 S.W.2d 854.
The judgment is affirmed.
All of the Judges concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Barker, 56195
...under Supreme Court Rule 28.07, V.A.M.R. without appreciating that a motion for new trial had not been filed. As we said in State v. Malloyd, Mo., 394 S.W.2d 405: 'The fact that a motion for new trial was not filed precludes us from consideration of matters required to be preserved in a mot......
-
State v. Morris, KCD
...a new trial was not filed precludes us from consideration of matters required to be preserved in a motion for new trial.' State v. Malloyd, 394 S.W.2d 405 (Mo.1965); State v. Green, 438 S.W.2d 274 (Mo.1969); State v. Deckard, 354 S.W.2d 886 (Mo.1962). We have reviewed this record proper as ......
-
Day v. Brandon, 51337
... ... The motion to dismiss was based on the ground that plaintiff's petition failed 'to state a claim upon which relief can be granted since it appears on the face of the petition that at the time of the death of Julia Day, she left a husband ... ...
-
State v. Thomas
...reasons which seem sufficient to you. Absent a motion for new trial, trial errors are not preserved for review on appeal, State v. Malloyd, 394 S.W.2d 405 (Mo.1965), and appellant's contentions may be considered only if there is plain error affecting substantial rights from which manifest i......