Turpin v. State

223 S.W.3d 175, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 635, 2007 WL 1186155
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedApril 24, 2007
DocketWD 65932
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 223 S.W.3d 175 (Turpin v. State) 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.

Bluebook
Turpin v. State, 223 S.W.3d 175, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 635, 2007 WL 1186155 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

THOMAS H. NEWTON, Judge.

Mr. Wade A. Turpin pled guilty to several criminal charges and was sentenced to twenty years of imprisonment. Subsequently, Mr. Turpin filed a Rule 24.035 post-conviction relief motion, which was denied for being untimely. 1 Thereafter, he filed a second Rule 24.035 post-conviction relief motion on August 22, 2005, which the motion court denied.

Mr. Turpin appeals the motion court’s ruling on the second Rule 24.035 post-conviction relief motion. The State urges dismissal of the appeal because the motion was successive.

Circuit courts are prohibited from reviewing successive motions. Rule 24.0S5C )• A motion is successive if it follows a previous post-conviction relief motion addressing the same conviction. See Kniest v. State, 133 S.W.3d 70, 71 (Mo. App. E.D.2003). On Form 40 (motion to vacate, set aside or correct the judgment or sentence), Mr. Turpin stated that he had previously filed a Rule 24.035 post-conviction relief motion. Accordingly, the motion court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the second motion. See Walker v. State, 194 S.W.3d 883, 885 (MoApp. E.D. 2006); Rule 24.035(/,). Because the circuit court lacked jurisdiction to review the motion, we also lack jurisdiction. Walker, 194 S.W.3d at 885. Thus, we dismiss the appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See id. at 884.

LISA WHITE HARDWICK, P.J., and ROBERT G. ULRICH, J. concur.

1

. Neither the State nor Mr. Turpin provides a date for the filing of the first post-conviction relief motion. In the Form 40, he does state that he began serving his sentence on March 8, 1985.

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

Related

Matthew B. Randolph v. State of Missouri
Missouri Court of Appeals, 2023
Jermaine Conner v. State of Missouri
Missouri Court of Appeals, 2021
Daniel McKay v. State of Missouri
Missouri Court of Appeals, 2016
ZEIGENBEIN v. State
364 S.W.3d 802 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2012)
Strickland v. State
241 S.W.3d 456 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
223 S.W.3d 175, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 635, 2007 WL 1186155, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/turpin-v-state-moctapp-2007.