State v. Nelson, KCD
| Decision Date | 07 July 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. KCD,KCD |
| Citation | 526 S.W.2d 56 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Odell NELSON, a/k/a Kenneth W. Finley, Defendant-Appellant. 27194. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Willard B. Bunch, Public Defender, Robert A. Simons, Asst. Public Defender, Kansas City, for defendant-appellant.
John C. Danforth, Atty. Gen., Preston Dean, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for plaintiff-respondent.
Before WASSERSTROM, P.J., and SHANGLER and DIXON, JJ.
On May 11, 1973, a grand jury returned an indictment against Odell Nelson, charging him with robbery, first degree. More specifically, it was charged that Nelson did, on April 24, 1973, make an assault on one Ronald McDonald with a loaded .38 caliber revolver and, by putting McDonald in fear of immediate injury to his person, robbed, stole, took and carried away $100 which was in the care and custody of McDonald. On September 20, 1973, the State was granted leave to file an amended information in lieu of this indictment. The amended information charged Kenneth W. Finley, a/k/a Odell Nelson, under the Second Offender Act with robbery, first degree in the aforementioned particulars. The jury returned a verdict of guilty, a the court, after overruling the motion for new trial and duly granting allocution, sentenced the defendant to seven years in the Missouri Department of Corrections. The defendant has appealed claiming that (1) certain evidence was inadmissible, and that (2) he was unduly prejudiced when the jury was made aware that he had an alias. We rule that these issues have not been preserved for appellate review.
Rule 27.20(a), V.A.M.R. requires that a motion for a new trial in a criminal case be filed within ten days after the verdict is returned. That rule also provides that the trial court may, upon application, extend the time a maximum of thirty additional days. The record of this case reveals that the jury verdict was returned September 24, 1973, and on the same date defendant was given thirty days in which to file a motion for new trial. No application for a further extension was made. The motion for new trial was filed on October 30, 1973, the 36th day after the verdict and order.
Compliance with Rule 27.20(a) is mandatory, and a motion for new trial not filed within the time fixed by the trial court is a nullity and preserves nothing for review. The motion for new trial in this case was not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Harley
...nothing for review. State v. Howard, 476 S.W.2d 587, 588 (Mo.1972); State v. White, 439 S.W.2d 752, 753(1) (Mo.1969); State v. Nelson, 526 S.W.2d 56, 57(1) (Mo.App.1975). This court has, of course, the discretionary power to review the record for plain error affecting substantial rights pur......
-
State v. Cooper, 10708
... ... However, the motion was not filed until May 12, 1977, or on the 16th day after verdict. Consequently, nothing embraced by the tardy motion was preserved for appellate review. State v. Brown, 543 S.W.2d 796(1) (Mo.App.1976); State v. Harris, 541 S.W.2d 686, 687(1) (Mo.App.1976); State v. Nelson, 526 S.W.2d 56, 57(1, 2) (Mo.App.1975). Nonetheless, if the evidence adduced was insufficient to sustain the conviction, plain error affecting substantial rights is involved and we will review the matter to see if such error is present vel non. Rule 27.20(c); State v. Asberry, 559 S.W.2d 764, ... ...
-
State v. Finley, KCD30384
...Judge. Defendant was convicted in 1974 of first degree robbery, and that conviction was affirmed by this court in 1975 in State v. Nelson, 526 S.W.2d 56 (Mo.App.1975). That appellate review was, however, abbreviated because this court was then under the belief that defendant's motion for ne......
-
State v. Crosby
...nothing for review. State v. Howard, 476 S.W.2d 587, 588 (Mo.1972); State v. White, 439 S.W.2d 752, 753(1) (Mo.1969); State v. Nelson, 526 S.W.2d 56, 57(1) (Mo.App.1975). Apparently recognizing the narrow scope of our review, defendant contents himself with the assertion of one ground of er......