STATE OF MISSOURI, Plaintiff-Respondent vs. ALTON L. VAUGHN, SR., Defendant-Appellant
Decision date: January 15, 2013SD32253
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
STATE OF MISSOURI, ) ) Plaintiff-Respondent, ) ) vs. ) No. SD32253 ) ALTON LOUIS VAUGHN, SR., ) Filed January 15, 2013 ) Defendant-Appellant. )
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF GREENE COUNTY
Honorable Joseph W. Schoeberl, Special Judge
APPEAL DISMISSED
Alton Louis Vaughn, Sr. ("Defendant") was convicted on four counts of the class D felony of unlawful merchandising practices, see section 407.020, RSMo 2000, and sentenced to a combined total of six years' incarceration and fines totaling $13,125.00. Defendant timely appealed those convictions, and after he failed to perfect that appeal, this court issued its mandate dismissing it on June 30, 2011. Defendant now appeals a trial court order entered on January 19, 2012, granting him probation under the provisions of section 559.115.2, RSMo Cum.Supp 2005. In the absence of a final judgment, this Court does not have statutory authority to hear this appeal or to take any action other than to dismiss it. There is no right of appeal without statutory authority. In criminal cases, [section] 547.070 authorizes appeals from "final" judgments; a final judgment occurs when a sentence is entered; and probation is not part of a sentence.
2 Consequently, there is no right to appeal a trial judge's decision to grant or deny probation. State v. Ferrell, 317 S.W.3d 688 (Mo.App. 2010) (internal citations and quotations omitted). Defendant asserts no point or argument otherwise in his brief. This appeal is dismissed.
GARY W. LYNCH, P.J. - Opinion author NANCY STEFFEN RAHMEYER, J. - concurs WILLIAM W. FRANCIS, JR., J. - concurs
Related Opinions
Rodney Lee Lincoln, Appellant, vs. State of Missouri, Respondent.(2014)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictDecember 2, 2104#ED100987
State of Missouri, Respondent, v. James McGregory, Appellant.(2026)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictMarch 10, 2026#ED113080
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.
STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent v. RUSSELL KENNETH CLANCY, Appellant(2026)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern DistrictFebruary 25, 2026#SD38782
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.
State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. James Willis Peters, Appellant.(2026)
Supreme Court of MissouriFebruary 24, 2026#SC101218
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.
State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. Gerald R. Nytes, Appellant.(2026)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictFebruary 17, 2026#ED113261
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.