State of Missouri, Respondent v. Keith Drury, Appellant.
Decision date: UnknownED85357
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. Keith Drury, Appellant. Case Number: ED85357 Handdown Date: 04/12/2005 Appeal From: Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Hon. Gary P. Kramer Counsel for Appellant: Joseph P. Cunningham III Counsel for Respondent: Robert G. Wilkins Opinion Summary: Keith Drury appeals from the judgment and sentence entered for misdemeanor third degree assault. APPEAL DISMISSED; CAUSE REMANDED. Division Five holds: The trial court sentenced Keith Drury prior to the filing and ruling on his motion for new trial, and thus, the judgment is void and there is no final, appealable judgment. Citation: Opinion Author: George W. Draper III, Chief Judge Opinion Vote: DISMISSED; CAUSE REMANDED. Crahan, J., and Norton, J., concur. Opinion: On September 23, 2004, the trial court found the defendant Keith Drury (Defendant) guilty of misdemeanor third degree assault. On that same day, the trial court entered a judgment against Defendant and sentenced him to pay a fine of $25.00. On October 1, 2004, Defendant filed a timely motion for new trial, which the trial court denied on October 25,
- Defendant now appeals from the judgment and sentence.
Under 29.11(c), which applies to misdemeanors, no judgment can be rendered until the time for filing the motion for
new trial has expired. Any judgment and sentence rendered by the trial court prior to the filing and ruling on the motion for new trial is premature and void. State v. Burkemper, 853 S.W.2d 416, 417 (Mo. App. E.D. 1993); See also, City of Byrnes Mill v. Rice, 136 S.W.3d 84, 85 (Mo. App. E.D. 2004); State v. Hauser, 101 S.W.3d 320, 321 (Mo. App. E.D. 2003). A defendant has the right to file a motion for new trial within 15 days after the trial court finds him guilty. Rule 29.11(b) & (e). Here, the trial court sentenced Defendant on September 23, 2004, the same day it found him guilty, prior to the filing and ruling on his motion for new trial. As a result, the judgment and sentence rendered by the court is void and there is no final judgment from which the defendant can appeal. Rice, 136 S.W.3d at 86. We have a duty to sua sponte determine whether we have jurisdiction to entertain an appeal. Hauser, 101 S.W.3d at
- We issued an order directing Defendant to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed. Defendant has
failed to file a response. The appeal is dismissed and the cause is remanded to the trial court to sentence Defendant in accordance with Rule
Separate Opinion: None This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.
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.