Ott Law Firm Agent-Safe Plain Text
Official source remains authoritative.

Case: Missouri Inmates, et al., Appellants, v. Missouri Department of Corrections, Respondent.
Case Number: SC83392
Court: Supreme Court of Missouri
Decision Date: Unknown
Outcome: affirmed
Practice Area: criminal-law
Canonical URL: https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/missouri-inmates-et-al-appellants-v-missouri-department-of-corrections-re-c83392
Official Source URL: https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=25937
Related Practice Areas:
- Criminal Law: https://ott.law/practice-areas/criminal-law?ott_archive=missouri-courts&ott_archive_practice_area=criminal-law&ott_archive_query=Missouri+Inmates%2C+et+al.%2C+Appellants%2C+v.+Missouri+Department+of+Corrections%2C+Respondent.&ott_archive_link_source=tag&ott_archive_link_score=20&ott_archive_link_evidence=tag%3A+criminal-law&ott_archive_location=opinion_plain_text_practice_area (slug: criminal-law; source: tag; score: 20; evidence: tag: criminal-law)

---
## Opinion

This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.
Opinion

Case Style:  Missouri Inmates, et al., Appellants, v. Missouri Department of Corrections, Respondent.
Case Number:  SC83392
Handdown Date:  06/12/2001
Appeal From:  Circuit Court of Cole County, Hon. Byron L. Kinder
Counsel for Appellant:  Chris Milner, David Anderson, George Robinson, Melvin Hayes and James Boersig
Counsel for Respondent:  Stephen D. Hawke
Opinion Summary: 
None
Citation: 
Opinion Author:  PER CURIAM
Opinion Vote:  AFFIRMED.  Price, C.J., Limbaugh, White, Holstein, Wolff and Benton, JJ., concur.  Stith, J., not 
participating.
Opinion:
Eighteen inmates sought a declaratory judgment that they are entitled to a conditional release as a part of their 
sentences.  The petition states virtually no facts with respect to specific sentences imposed.  According to the petition, 
section 558.011 creates a liberty interest in conditional release so that all sentences have a conditional release 
component.  The inmates also contend the 1994 version of section 558.019 does not apply to their sentences as it has 
been repealed.  Finally, the inmates allege that sections 558.011.5, 557.036, and 558.019 are unconstitutional.
The circuit court found that the petition failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and dismissed the 
petition.  Five inmates appeal to this Court because the case involves the validity of various statutes.  Mo. Const. article V, 
section 3. 
There is no error of law.  An opinion would have no precedential value in light of the petition's lack of factual 
pleadings and  Elliott v. Carnahan, 916 S.W.2d 239 (Mo. App. 1996).   The trial court's judgment is affirmed by this 

memorandum decision.  Rule 84.16(b).   
Separate Opinion:
None
This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.