State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Derrick Thomas, Appellant.

This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court. Opinion Missouri Court of Appeals Western District Case Style: State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Derrick Thomas, Appellant. Case Number: 54465 Handdown Date: 07/07/1998 Appeal From: Circuit Court of Jackson County, Hon. Jay Daugherty Counsel for Appellant: J. Philip Crawford Counsel for Respondent: Daniel Barry Opinion Summary: The Juvenile Division of the Jackson County Circuit Court held a hearing and waived jurisdiction allowing prosecution under the general law. The defendant appeals from this decision. DISMISSED. Division III holds: The Missouri Supreme Court held that the dismissal of a petition in juvenile court and to allow prosecution under the general law pursuant to section 211.071, RSMo 1994, is not a final order from which an appeal is allowed. Citation: Opinion Author: Forest W. Hanna, Presiding Judge Opinion Vote: DISMISSED. Stith and Smith, J.J., concur. Opinion: Derrick Thomas was 15 years of age on November 21, 1996. On March 8, 1997, he was referred to the Juvenile Division of the Jackson County Circuit Court for rape, section 566.030, RSMo 1994. On March 12, 1997, the attorney for the juvenile officer filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 211.071, RSMo 1994, waiving jurisdiction and recommending transfer to the adult court. A hearing was held on April 24, 1997, and shortly thereafter the juvenile judge

waived jurisdiction and allowed prosecution under the general law. Thomas appeals, arguing that the juvenile judge erred because he had received little or no services for his drug problem since his previous referral. The Missouri Supreme Court held in In Re T.J.H., that a dismissal of a petition to allow prosecution under the general law pursuant to section 211.071, RSMo 1994, is not a final order from which an appeal is allowed. 479 S.W.2d 433, 434 (Mo. banc 1972). See also In the Interest of A.D.R., 515 S.W.2d 438, 439 (Mo. banc 1974). The court determined that allowing interlocutory review of the order would not be appropriate because delay of prosecution could jeopardize the entire proceeding. In Re T.J.H., 479 S.W.2d at 434. The court noted that the exclusive method for review of a Juvenile Division's order is to file a motion to dismiss the indictment in the court of general jurisdiction. Id. at 435. Appeal dismissed. Separate Opinion: None This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.