Blackmon v. Missouri Board of Probation and Parole

97 S.W.3d 458, 2003 Mo. LEXIS 10
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedJanuary 14, 2003
DocketSC 84287
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 97 S.W.3d 458 (Blackmon v. Missouri Board of Probation and Parole) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Blackmon v. Missouri Board of Probation and Parole, 97 S.W.3d 458, 2003 Mo. LEXIS 10 (Mo. 2003).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Odell Blackmon is currently serving prison sentences for murder, first degree, and assault with intent to kill with malice for crimes committed in 1977. He filed this action alleging that: (1) his sentence for assault is excessive; (2) the judges of Cole County are predisposed and prejudiced against prisoners; (3) section 506.360, RSMo 2000, is unconstitutional with respect to requiring filing fees in habeas corpus actions; (4) the preliminary hearing on the probation revocation was improperly waived based on “disinformation;” (5) the new regulations granting parole review every five years, instead of every two years under the old regulations, are unconstitutional; (6) other prisoners have received more favorable consideration by the board; and (7) the attorney general’s office litigates parole cases in extreme bad faith and uses fraud. As the case involves the validity of a state statute, this Court has jurisdiction. Mo. Const, article V, section 3.

The circuit court treated the claims as a petition for writ of habeas corpus and denied relief. There is no appeal from the denial of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. E.W. v. K.D.M., 490 S.W.2d 64, 67 (Mo. banc 1973). Promptness of adjudication can be best accomplished by the filing of a new petition for writ of habeas corpus rather than taking an ordinary appeal from the judgment of the circuit court. The court of appeals has substantial flexibility in handling the petition for habeas corpus filed therein. Id.

The appeal is dismissed.

All concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Vance R. Clark v. Doris Falkenrath, Warden
Missouri Court of Appeals, 2022
Vann v. Russell
439 S.W.3d 852 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2014)
State v. Gibbs
418 S.W.3d 522 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2013)
Ferguson v. Dormire
413 S.W.3d 40 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2013)
Bromwell v. Nixon
361 S.W.3d 393 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 2012)
Guerra v. Lombardi
336 S.W.3d 167 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2011)
Weir v. State
301 S.W.3d 136 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2010)
Asher v. Moore
272 S.W.3d 878 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2008)
Sumpter v. Blake
249 S.W.3d 924 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2008)
Garner v. Roper
224 S.W.3d 623 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2007)
Buchanan v. State
216 S.W.3d 238 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2007)
Barker v. Rowley
185 S.W.3d 805 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2006)
Waserman v. Purkett
169 S.W.3d 151 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2005)
Shanks v. Purkett
169 S.W.3d 149 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2005)
Hubert v. Purkett
165 S.W.3d 585 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2005)
Sorenson v. Luebbers
158 S.W.3d 860 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2005)
Moore v. Luebbers
158 S.W.3d 861 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2005)
Buff v. Roper
155 S.W.3d 811 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
97 S.W.3d 458, 2003 Mo. LEXIS 10, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blackmon-v-missouri-board-of-probation-and-parole-mo-2003.