State v. Payne
This text of 403 S.W.3d 606 (State v. Payne) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
In November 1995, Timmy Payne (“Appellant”) pleaded guilty to the crime of burglary and was sentenced to a seven-year term of imprisonment in the Department of Corrections. Fifteen years later, in December 2010, Appellant filed a motion in his criminal case asking the trial court to vacate his conviction based on a claim of actual innocence. After the trial court denied his motion, Appellant filed this appeal.
Because we lack the necessary statutory authority to hear Appellant’s appeal, we must dismiss it.
“There is no right to appeal without statutory authority.” State v. Williams, 871 S.W.2d 450, 452 (Mo. banc 1994). Although Appellant cites Rule 24.035(g)1 in his brief, he nonetheless filed his “Motion for Relief to Vacate, Set-Aside Conviction and Sentence” in his criminal case.2 “In criminal cases, section 547.070, RSMo 2000, allows appeals from final judgments, which occur when the court enters a judgment of conviction and sentence.” State v. Smith, 204 S.W.3d 697 (Mo.App. E.D. 2006).3 Orders entered in criminal cases after the judgment has become final which deny motions requesting various types of relief are not appealable. See, e.g., State v. Ferrell, 317 S.W.3d 688, 689 (Mo.App. S.D. 2010) (order denying probation); Smith, 204 S.W.3d at 697 (order denying motion for a hearing de novo); State v. Goodloe, 285 S.W.3d 769 (Mo.App. E.D.2009) (order denying a motion for credit for time served); Harris v. State, 48 S.W.3d 71 (Mo.App. W.D.2001) (order denying a motion to correct plain error under Rule 29.12(b)).
Here, Appellant did not timely appeal his 1995 judgment of conviction and sentence. Section 547.070, RSMo 2000, provides us with no authority to hear it at this late date. Because no other statute grants us such authority, Ferrell, 317 S.W.3d at 689; Smith, 204 S.W.3d at 697-98, Appellant’s appeal is dismissed.4
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
403 S.W.3d 606, 2011 WL 6382160, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1669, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-payne-moctapp-2011.