Ott Law Firm

State ex rel. Anthony Ashford, Petitioner, v. Larry Rowley, Superintendent(FN1), Respondent and Circuit Court of Cole County, Respondent.

Decision date: UnknownSC85171

Parties & Roles

Disposition

Undetermined

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.

Related Legal Help

Researching a similar criminal law issue?

This archive page is for legal research. For a practical overview of claims, deadlines, evidence, and next steps, start with the related practice page.

Opinion

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

Case Style: State ex rel. Anthony Ashford, Petitioner, v. Larry Rowley, Superintendent(FN1), Respondent and Circuit Court of Cole County, Respondent. Case Number: SC85171 Handdown Date: 11/04/2003 Appeal From: ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN MANDAMUS Counsel for Appellant: Anthony Ashford Counsel for Respondent: Stephen D. Hawke Opinion Summary: The circuit court ordered Anthony Ashford to pay the crime victim's compensation fund $26 and $68 for crimes occurring in March 1981. He seeks mandamus relief from this Court. PEREMPTORY WRIT ORDERED TO ISSUE. Court en banc holds: The circuit court's judgments exceed those allowed by law. Section 595.045, RSMo Supp. 1981, which creates the crime victim's compensation fund, cannot be applied to crimes occurring before its effective date of October 1, 1981. Citation: Opinion Author: PER CURIAM Opinion Vote: PEREMPTORY WRIT ORDERED TO ISSUE. White, C.J., Wolff, Benton, Stith, Price and Limbaugh, JJ., and Rahmeyer, Sp. J., concur. Teitelman, J., not participating. Opinion: The Cole County Circuit Court entered judgments that Anthony Ashford pay the crime victim's compensation fund $26 and $68 for crimes occurring on March 12, 1981. The statute creating the crime victim's compensation fund, section

595.045, RSMo Supp. 1981, cannot be applied to crimes occurring before October 1, 1981 - its effective date. Herron v. State, 728 S.W.2d 569, 572 (Mo. App. 1987); Wright v. State, 677 S.W.2d 425, 425-26 (Mo. App. 1984); State v. Davis, 645 S.W.2d 160, 162-63 (Mo. App. 1982). The Cole County judgments exceed those allowed by law. The Cole County Circuit Court is added as a party. State ex rel. Breckenridge v. Sweeney, 920 S.W.2d 901, 904 (Mo. banc 1996). A peremptory writ is issued for that court to correct its sentences. This Court's previously issued alternative writ is quashed. Ashford's other claims for relief are rejected. Footnotes: FN1. This action was originally brought against Linda Sachse, as acting superintendent. Larry Rowley has become superintendent and is substituted under Rule 52.13(d). Separate Opinion: None This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.

Authorities Cited

Statutes, rules, and cases referenced in this opinion.

Statutes

Rules

Cases

Related Opinions

Other opinions in the same practice area.

State of Missouri, Respondent, v. James McGregory, Appellant.(2026)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictMarch 10, 2026#ED113080

affirmed

McGregory appealed his convictions for domestic assault in the third degree and property damage in the second degree, raising unpreserved claims of error regarding evidence admissibility and the Crime Victims' Compensation Fund judgment amount. The court affirmed the convictions but modified the CVC judgment amount, finding the trial court entered a judgment in excess of that authorized by law.

Criminal LawCivil Litigationper_curiam3,374 words
Read opinion

STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent v. RUSSELL KENNETH CLANCY, Appellant(2026)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern DistrictFebruary 25, 2026#SD38782

affirmed

The court affirmed Clancy's conviction for second-degree assault against a special victim after a jury trial. The evidence was sufficient to prove that Clancy punched an elderly civilian in the face and struck a police officer during an altercation at a laundromat, supporting the conviction under Missouri statute § 565.052.3.

Criminal LawCivil Litigationper_curiam1,516 words
Read opinion

State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. James Willis Peters, Appellant.(2026)

Supreme Court of MissouriFebruary 24, 2026#SC101218

remanded

James Willis Peters appealed his conviction for driving while intoxicated as a chronic offender, challenging whether the state proved beyond a reasonable doubt that all four of his prior offenses were intoxication-related traffic offenses. The court found the state failed to sufficiently prove his 2002 offense was an IRTO and therefore vacated the judgment and remanded for resentencing.

Criminal LawCivil Litigationper_curiam3,993 words
Read opinion

State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. Gerald R. Nytes, Appellant.(2026)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictFebruary 17, 2026#ED113261

affirmed

Gerald Nytes appealed his conviction for violating a full order of protection, arguing the State failed to prove he had notice of the order as required by statute. The court affirmed, finding sufficient evidence of notice based on Nytes's presence at the contested order of protection hearing and his subsequent violation through phone calls made from jail to the protected party.

Read opinion

State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. Deandre D. Walton, Appellant.(2026)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictFebruary 17, 2026#ED112976

affirmed

Appellant Deandre Walton appealed his convictions for two counts of first-degree murder, two counts of armed criminal action, and unlawful possession of a firearm, arguing the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress statements and admitting evidence of his statements at trial. The appellate court affirmed the convictions, finding no error in the trial court's denial of the suppression motion.

Criminal LawCivil Litigationper_curiam1,670 words
Read opinion