IN THE MATTER OF THE CARE AND TREATMENT OF DONALD PECKHAM, a/k/a DONALD D. PECKHAM, a/k/a DONALD DEAN PECKHAM, Respondent-Appellant v. STATE OF MISSOURI, Petitioner-Respondent
Decision date: December 21, 2020SD36302
Parties & Roles
- Appellant
- IN THE MATTER OF THE CARE AND TREATMENT OF DONALD PECKHAM, a/k/a DONALD D. PECKHAM, a/k/a DONALD DEAN PECKHAM, Respondent-
- Respondent
- STATE OF MISSOURI, Petitioner-
Judges
- Trial Court Judge
- Before Bates·David B
Disposition
Remanded
Procedural posture: Appeal from sexually violent predator commitment
Slip Opinion Notice
This archive contains Missouri appellate slip opinions reproduced for research convenience, not the final official reporter version. Official source links remain authoritative where provided. Joseph Ott, Attorney 67889, Ott Law Firm - Constant Victory - Personal Injury and Litigation maintains these public legal archives to support Missouri case research and to help prospective clients connect that research to the firm's courtroom practice.
Opinion
IN THE MATTER OF THE CARE ) AND TREATMENT OF ) DONALD PECKHAM, ) a/k/a DONALD D. PECKHAM, ) a/k/a DONALD DEAN PECKHAM, ) ) Respondent-Appellant, ) ) v. ) No. SD36302 ) Filed: December 21, 2020 STATE OF MISSOURI, ) ) Petitioner-Respondent. )
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JASPER COUNTY Honorable David B. Mouton, Circuit Judge Before Bates, C.J./P.J., Lynch, J., and Sheffield, J.
REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS
PER CURIAM. Donald Peckham (Appellant) was found to be a sexually violent predator pursuant to § 632.480 RSMo (2016) and was committed to the custody of the Department of Mental Health for treatment. The judgment was affirmed on appeal by this Court on August 31, 2020. Thereafter, Appellant filed an application for transfer with our Supreme Court. While the application was pending, Appellant died. The Supreme Court
2
accepted the suggestions of death filed by counsel, struck all prior filings by Appellant, and closed its case. "Missouri courts have long recognized the doctrine of abatement ab initio[.]" State v. Mott, 569 S.W.3d 555, 556 (Mo. App. 2019). "It is not the appeal which abates, but the prosecution itself, the right of the action itself[.]" Baker v. Modern Woodmen of America, 121 S.W. 794, 797 (Mo. App. 1909). Abatement "means an extinguishment of the very right of action itself." Id. The abatement doctrine applies to criminal cases as well as certain civil matters. Town of Carrollton v. Rhomberg, 78 Mo. 547, 549 (1883); City of Clayton v. Sigoloff, 452 S.W.2d 315, 316 (Mo. App. 1970). "In general, an action which is personal abates upon the death of a party." In re Marriage of Carter, 794 S.W.2d 321, 322 (Mo. App. 1990). In such a case, "[w]hen an appellant dies prior to his appeal becoming final, we are required to remand the case to the circuit court to dismiss the underlying action." Mott, 569 S.W.3d at 556. 1
Accordingly, we withdraw our opinion filed August 31, 2020, and remand this matter to the circuit court with directions to vacate its judgment and commitment order, and to dismiss the underlying petition.
1 The common law rule of abatement has been abrogated by statute in certain instances. See, e.g., Breeden v. Hueser, 273 S.W.3d 1, 11 (Mo. App. 2008). Sexually violent predator cases are purely personal to the convicted sex offender and we find no statute to the contrary.
Authorities Cited
Statutes, rules, and cases referenced in this opinion.
Statutes
- RSMo § 632.480cited
§ 632.480 RSMo
Cases
- breeden v hueser 273 sw3d 1cited
Breeden v. Hueser, 273 S.W.3d 1
- clayton v sigoloff 452 sw2d 315cited
Clayton v. Sigoloff, 452 S.W.2d 315
- state v mott 569 sw3d 555followed
State v. Mott, 569 S.W.3d 555
- town of carrollton v rhomberg 78 mo 547cited
Town of Carrollton v. Rhomberg, 78 Mo. 547
Holdings
Issue-specific holdings extracted from the court's opinion.
Issue: Whether the death of an appellant in a sexually violent predator commitment case, while the appeal is pending, causes the underlying action to abate.
Yes, the doctrine of abatement ab initio applies to sexually violent predator cases, requiring the underlying judgment and commitment order to be vacated and the petition dismissed.
Related Opinions
Cases sharing legal topics and authorities with this opinion.
Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region & Southwest Missouri, Respondent/Cross-Appellant, vs. Andrew Bailey, Attorney General, State of Missouri, Appellant/Cross-Respondent.(2025)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictMay 6, 2025#ED112842
Larry Rice, Appellant, vs. Midland States Bank and Midland States Bancorp, Inc., Respondents.(2024)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictJuly 16, 2024#ED112264
Sharon Watson, as Trustee of the George T. and Mary E. Watson Trust dated November 18, 1997, Appellant, v. Menard, Inc. d/b/a Menards, and City of Richmond Heights, Missouri, Respondents.(2021)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictNovember 23, 2021#ED109525
Jeanne H. Olofson, Appellant, vs. Scott W. Olofson, in his Capacity as Personal Representative of the Estate of Tom W. Olofson, Respondent.(2021)
Supreme Court of MissouriJuly 22, 2021#SC98043
Blackwood, Langworthy & Tyson, LLC vs. Jon D. Knipp, et al(2019)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western DistrictJanuary 22, 2019#WD81006
Planned Parenthood Great Plains vs. State of Missouri ex rel. Attorney General Andrew Bailey(2025)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District#WD87008