State of Missouri, Respondent v. James A. Mahurin, Appellant.
Decision date: UnknownED88470
Parties & Roles
- Appellant
- James A. Mahurin
- Respondent
- State of Missouri
Disposition
Dismissed
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, Respondent v. James A. Mahurin, Appellant. Case Number: ED88470 Handdown Date: 11/28/2006 Appeal From: Circuit Court of St. Francois County, Hon. Kenneth W. Pratte Counsel for Appellant: James A. Mahurin, Pro Se Counsel for Respondent: Shaun J. Mackelprang Opinion Summary: James Mahurin appeals from an order denying his release on probation under section 217.362, RSMo. APPEAL DISMISSED. Division Five holds: An order denying release on probation under section 217.362 is not a final, appealable judgment and Mahurin's appeal must be dismissed. Citation: Opinion Author: Booker T. Shaw, Chief Judge Opinion Vote: DISMISSED. Norton, J. and Cohen, J., concur. Opinion: James Mahurin (Defendant) appeals from an order denying his release on probation under section 217.362, RSMo 2000. Because such an order is not a final, appealable judgment, the appeal is dismissed. No right of an appeal exists without statutory authority. State v. Williams, 871 S.W.2d 450, 452 (Mo. banc 1994). In criminal cases, section 547.070, RSMo 2000, allows appeals from final judgments, which occur when the court enters a judgment of conviction and sentence. State v. Larson, 79 S.W.3d 891, 893 (Mo. banc 2002). Defendant is not appealing
from his judgment of conviction or sentence, but rather an order denying his release on probation under section 217.362. Probation is not part of the Defendant's sentence. State v. McKinzie, 968 S.W.2d 160, 161 (Mo. App. E.D. 1998). There is no right to appeal a trial court's decision to deny probation under section 217.362. Id. Thus, this Court is without jurisdiction to review the merits of Defendant's appeal. Id. This Court has a duty to sua sponte determine our jurisdiction. State v. Dunn, 103 S.W.3d 886, 887 (Mo. App. E.D. 2003). This Court issued an order directing Defendant to show cause why his appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Defendant has not filed a response. The appeal is dismissed for lack of a final, appealable judgment. 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
- RSMo § 217.362cited
section 217.362, RSMo
- RSMo § 547.070cited
section 547.070, RSMo
Cases
- no right of an appeal exists without statutory authority state v williams 871 sw2d 450cited
No right of an appeal exists without statutory authority. State v. Williams, 871 S.W.2d 450
- probation is not part of the defendants sentence state v mckinzie 968 sw2d 160cited
Probation is not part of the Defendant's sentence. State v. McKinzie, 968 S.W.2d 160
- state v larson 79 sw3d 891cited
State v. Larson, 79 S.W.3d 891
- this court has a duty to sua sponte determine our jurisdiction state v dunn 103 sw3d 886cited
This Court has a duty to sua sponte determine our jurisdiction. State v. Dunn, 103 S.W.3d 886
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.