From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Dieter

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Division Two
Nov 16, 1992
840 S.W.2d 887 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992)

Opinion

No. 18089.

November 16, 1992.

APPEAL FROM CIRCUIT COURT, ST. CLAIR COUNTY, DAVID E. BAILEY, ASSOCIATE JUDGE.

Gary E. Brotherton, Columbia, for defendant-appellant.

No appearance for plaintiff-respondent.


Defendant was charged with misdemeanor assault. Following nonjury trial, he was found guilty and fined $1,000. Defendant appeals.

Judgment was rendered before the time expired for defendant to file a motion for new trial under Rule 29.11. Therefore, the purported judgment was premature and void and there was no judgment from which an appeal could lie. State v. Wren, 609 S.W.2d 480, 481 (Mo.App. 1980). See also State v. Ramos, 751 S.W.2d 135, 136 (Mo.App. 1988).

The appeal is dismissed and the case remanded to the trial court with directions to either afford defendant the opportunity to file a motion for new trial or to waive his right to do so. If the right is waived expressly or by time or if a motion for new trial is filed and denied, the court may thereafter sentence defendant. Defendant will then have the right to appeal.

MONTGOMERY, P.J., and MAUS, J., concur.


Summaries of

State v. Dieter

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Division Two
Nov 16, 1992
840 S.W.2d 887 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992)
Case details for

State v. Dieter

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF MISSOURI, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. HAROLD DIETER…

Court:Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Division Two

Date published: Nov 16, 1992

Citations

840 S.W.2d 887 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992)

Citing Cases

State v. DeGraffenreid

Under Rule 29.11(b) and (e), Missouri Rules of Criminal Procedure (1992), Appellant had the right to file a…

State v. Dean

The record here is barren of any indication that Defendant waived his right to file a motion for new trial,…