OTT LAW

STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent vs. JOSEPH THERON WRIGHT, Appellant

Decision date: February 11, 2020SD36013

Parties & Roles

Appellant
JOSEPH THERON WRIGHT
Respondent
STATE OF MISSOURI

Judges

Trial Court Judge
Robert N

Disposition

Mixed outcome

  • {"type":"reversed","scope":"persistent-assault-offender finding","subject":"sentencing enhancement"}
  • {"type":"affirmed","scope":"overruling objection to closing argument","subject":"comment on failure to testify"}

Procedural posture: Appeal from conviction

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, ) ) Respondent, ) ) vs. ) No. SD36013 ) JOSEPH THERON WRIGHT, ) FILED: February 11, 2020 ) Appellant. )

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF STODDARD COUNTY Honorable Robert N. Mayer, Judge REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS Convicted of second-degree domestic assault, a class D felony, Appellant received a 12-year sentence as a § 565.079 persistent assault offender, which the state now concedes as error. 1 Finding no merit to Appellant's other point, we reverse and remand for resentencing. The persistent-assault-offender finding was based on Appellant's two other assault convictions, one in 2012, but the other on August 28, 2018, a week after the instant offense. We agree with the parties that this was error; all findings of guilt needed to pre-date the instant offense. § 565.079.10. We also agree that proper recourse is to reverse and remand for resentencing within the range of punishment for a class C felony, three to ten years. 2

1 Statutory citations are RSMo as amended through 2017. 2 Both parties acknowledge the court's finding that Appellant also was a § 558.016 persistent felony offender based on his 2012 felony assault plea and a 2011 felony drug plea.

2

We reject Appellant's other charge that the trial court "abused its discretion or plainly erred" in overruling Appellant's objection to an alleged closing-argument comment on Appellant's failure to testify. Plain error is the applicable standard given the objection's lack of specificity, and no manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice appears. 3 See State v. Hawkins, 328 S.W.3d 799, 812-14 (Mo.App. 2010). We reverse and remand solely for resentencing consistent with this opinion.

DANIEL E. SCOTT, P.J. – OPINION AUTHOR JEFFREY W. BATES, C.J. – CONCURS MARY W. SHEFFIELD, J. – CONCURS

3 We quote the transcript: [PROSECUTOR]: [The victim] came. She faced her accuser. She faced her assaulter. Stood on the stand and told you what happened. That's the evidence in this case. And that's what happened here. It's unrefuted. That's the big five dollar word that lawyers use to say there's nobody saying anything else. [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: Objection, Your Honor. The Defendant's pled not guilty. He's certainly disputing the victim's statements. [PROSECUTOR]: I'm talking about what's in evidence. THE COURT: All right. The Court will overrule the objection. Specific objections to arguments or statements of counsel are required to draw the court's attention to the reason for objection. See State v. Neighbors, 502 S.W.3d 745, 748 (Mo.App. 2016). Here, trial counsel's objection ("The Defendant's pled not guilty. He's certainly disputing the victim's statements.") differs from Point 2 on appeal (impermissible comment on a defendant's right to remain silent).

Authorities Cited

Statutes, rules, and cases referenced in this opinion.

Cases

Holdings

Issue-specific holdings extracted from the court's opinion.

AI-generated
  1. Issue: Whether the trial court erred in sentencing Appellant as a persistent assault offender when one prior conviction post-dated the instant offense.

    Yes; all findings of guilt for persistent offender status must pre-date the instant offense, and the case must be remanded for resentencing.

  2. Issue: Whether the trial court plainly erred in overruling Appellant's objection to a closing-argument comment on Appellant's failure to testify.

    No; given the lack of specificity in the objection, no manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice appears to warrant plain error relief.

    Standard of review: Plain error

Related Opinions

Cases sharing legal topics and authorities with this opinion.

State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Elizabeth M. Speer, Appellant.(2026)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictFebruary 17, 2026#ED113172

reversed

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.

criminal-lawper_curiam4,420 words

CARL CAMERON FERGUSON, Appellant v. STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent(2026)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern DistrictFebruary 3, 2026#SD38798

affirmed

The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of post-conviction relief, finding that Ferguson failed to establish ineffective assistance of counsel for trial counsel's failure to call witnesses in his favor. The court concluded that Ferguson did not proffer the names of any viable defense witnesses and that witness selection constitutes trial strategy.

criminal-lawper_curiam1,801 words

Craig M. Wood, Appellant, vs. State of Missouri, Respondent.(2026)

Supreme Court of MissouriJanuary 13, 2026#SC100874

affirmed

Craig Wood appealed the overruling of his Rule 29.15 motion for postconviction relief challenging his first-degree murder conviction and death sentence for the 2014 abduction and murder of 10-year-old Hailey Owens. The court affirmed the motion court's judgment, finding no ineffective assistance of counsel or other grounds for postconviction relief warranting reversal of Wood's conviction and sentence.

criminal-lawper_curiam5,199 words

State ex rel. Catherine Hanaway, Relator, vs. The Honorable Craig Hellmann, Respondent.(2026)

Supreme Court of MissouriJanuary 13, 2026#SC101132

affirmed

The Missouri Supreme Court upheld section 577.023.2, which allows circuit courts rather than juries to determine whether prior DWI convictions occurred on separate occasions for purposes of charging a persistent offender felony. The court rejected the defendant's argument that this procedure facially violates the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, finding the statute constitutional and that the circuit court lacked authority to dismiss the felony charge.

criminal-lawper_curiam2,445 words

Harry Little, Appellant, vs. State of Missouri, Respondent.(2026)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictJanuary 13, 2026#ED113257

affirmed

The court affirmed the denial of post-conviction relief for Harry Little's convictions for murder in the second degree, armed criminal action, and unlawful possession of a firearm. Trial counsel's decisions not to call an alibi witness and not to argue a specific alternative perpetrator in closing argument constituted reasonable trial strategy rather than ineffective assistance of counsel.

criminal-lawmajority3,574 words

State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Jeffrey Lematty, Appellant.(2026)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictJanuary 13, 2026#ED112791

affirmed

The defendant was convicted of first-degree rape and second-degree burglary. The appellate court affirmed the rape conviction but reversed the burglary conviction due to plain error in the jury instruction regarding second-degree burglary.

criminal-lawmajority6,723 words