State v. Malloyd

Supreme Court of Missouri

State v. Malloyd

394 S.W.2d 405, 1965 Mo. LEXIS 711

CourtSupreme Court of Missouri

DecidedOctober 11, 1965

DocketNo. 51289

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 394 S.W.2d 405 (State v. Malloyd) 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

State v. Malloyd, 394 S.W.2d 405, 1965 Mo. LEXIS 711 (Mo. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

FINCH, Judge.

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.

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

FINCH, Judge.

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

394 S.W.2d 405, 1965 Mo. LEXIS 711, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-malloyd-mo-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack