State of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Constandinos Kastanas, Defendant/Appellant. Constandinos Kastanas, Movant/Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
Decision date: Unknown
Parties & Roles
- Appellant
- Constandinos Kastanas, Defendant/·Constandinos Kastanas, Defendant/Appellant. Constandinos Kastanas, Movant/Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent/
- Respondent
- State of Missouri, Plaintiff/
Disposition
Affirmed
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
This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court. Opinion Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District Case Style: State of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Constandinos Kastanas, Defendant/Appellant. Constandinos Kastanas, Movant/Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent. Case Number: Nos. 68178/70397/70547 Handdown Date: 06/27/1997 Appeal From: Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, Hon. Thomas F. McGuire Counsel for Appellant: Counsel for Respondent: Opinion Summary: Citation: Opinion Author: Per Curiam Opinion Vote: AFFIRMED. Before Dowd, Jr., P.J., Reinhard, J. and Gaertner, J. Opinion:
O R D E R Defendant appeals after he was convicted by a jury of the class C felony of possession of a controlled substance, Section 195.202, RSMo Supp. 1993, and the class A misdemeanor of possession of drug paraphernalia, Section 195.233, RSMo Supp. 1993. The trial court found that defendant had previously been convicted of three felonies: (1) robbery in the second degree; (2) robbery in the second degree; and (3) burglary in the first degree. The court found defendant to be a prior and persistent and class X offender and sentenced him to a ten year prison term for possession of the controlled substance and a concurrent one year prison term for the possession of drug paraphernalia. The trial court sentenced defendant as a class X offender "subject to the minimum prison term pursuant to Section 558.019, RSMo.[Supp. 1993]." Defendant also appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. We
affirm. We have reviewed the record and find the claims of error are without merit; the judgment of the motion court is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b). Separate Opinion: 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
- RSMo § 195.202cited
Section 195.202, RSMo
- RSMo § 195.233cited
Section 195.233, RSMo
- RSMo § 558.019cited
Section 558.019, RSMo
Rules
- Rule 29.15cited
Rule 29.15
Related Opinions
Other opinions in the same practice area.
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, v. Elizabeth M. Speer, Appellant.(2026)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictFebruary 17, 2026#ED113172
The court reversed defendant's convictions for second-degree property damage and fourth-degree assault because the trial court failed to conduct an adequate Faretta hearing and failed to ensure a written waiver of counsel was entered prior to trial, as required by Missouri law. Although the defendant did not preserve the issue by objecting at trial, the court found the error must be reviewed because the failure to conduct a proper Faretta hearing is a constitutional violation that cannot be waived.