STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent vs. RAMONE T. LANDA, Appellant
Decision date: UnknownSD29146
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
1
STATE OF MISSOURI, ) ) Respondent ) ) vs. ) No. SD29146 ) RAMONE T. LANDA, ) ) Appellant )
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF DUNKLIN COUNTY
Honorable Stephen R. Sharp, Circuit Judge
DISMISSED
Ramone T. Landa (defendant) was convicted following a bench trial of trafficking in the second degree, a class A felony. § 195.223, RSMo 2000. Defendant's trial occurred April 19,
- The trial court took the case under submission. The trial judge announced that he would
render a verdict April 25, 2007. On April 25, 2007, the state appeared by the prosecuting attorney of Dunklin County. Defendant appeared with his attorney. The trial court found defendant guilty and set sentencing for June 13, 2007.
2 Defendant failed to appear for sentencing. Bond was forfeited and a capias ordered. Defendant was apprehended October 24, 2007, in Cook County, Illinois. He was thereafter sentenced to imprisonment for a term of 15 years. He seeks to appeal that conviction. The state filed a motion to dismiss the appeal contending that by fleeing the state of Missouri and remaining at large for more than four months, defendant's actions adversely affected the justice system; that the trial court was required to issue a capias warrant and required to expend resources to apprehend defendant and to transport him from Cook County, Illinois, for sentencing. That motion was taken with case. The motion is granted. "The 'escape rule' operates to deny the right of appeal to one who, following a conviction, has attempted to escape justice." State v. Wright, 763 S.W.2d 167, 168 (Mo.App. 1988). "Those who seek the protection of this legal system must . . . be willing to abide by its rules and decisions." Id. at 168-69. Persons convicted of crimes who thereafter abscond fail to accept the decision of the trial court or to await the vindication of their rights by an appellate court. Id. at 169. They may not, selectively, choose whether to abide by the courts' decisions. Id., citing Wayne v. Wyrick, 646 F.2d 1268, 1271 (8 th Cir. 1981). By absconding, defendant forfeited his right to appeal. State v. Wright, supra. The state's motion to dismiss defendant's appeal is granted. Appeal dismissed.
JOHN E. PARRISH, Judge Lynch, C.J., and Burrell, P.J., concur
Appellant's attorney – Craig A. Johnston Respondent's attorney – Chris Koster, Mary H. Moore
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.