State of Missouri vs. Zachariah A. Hinton
Decision date: UnknownWD80958
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, v.
ZACHARIAH A. HINTON, Appellant. ) ) ) ) ) )
WD80958
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY THE HONORABLE JEFFREY L. BUSHUR, JUDGE
BEFORE DIVISION TWO: MARK D. PFEIFFER, PRESIDING JUDGE, LISA WHITE HARDWICK AND EDWARD R. ARDINI, JR., JUDGES
Zachariah Hinton appeals from his conviction for driving while revoked or suspended. He contends the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. Because Hinton failed to provide us with a complete record, we must dismiss his appeal. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On September 12, 2016, the State charged Hinton with driving while revoked or suspended pursuant to Section 302.321, RSMo 2016. A bench trial was held on July 20, 2017, during which the court found Hinton guilty. Subsequently, the court sentenced Hinton to five days in the Jackson County Jail. Hinton appeals.
ANALYSIS Although Hinton appears pro se in this appeal, "he is still generally held to the same standard as a licensed attorney." City of St. Louis v. Hill, 488 S.W.3d 156, 159 (Mo. App. 2016). "The record on appeal shall contain all of the record, proceedings, and evidence necessary to the determination of all questions to be presented by either appellant or respondent to the appellate court for decision. It is divided into two components; the legal file and the transcript." Rule 30.04(a). It is Hinton's duty to ensure that we receive the complete record on appeal, which includes a transcript of any relevant proceeding. State v. Sumowski, 794 S.W.2d 643, 646 (Mo. banc 1990); Rule 30.04(c). Hinton's point on appeal alleges that the circuit court's finding of guilt was not supported by the evidence because the State failed to prove that the arresting officer had reason to believe Hinton was operating a motor vehicle with a suspended driver's license. In support of his appeal, Hinton provided a legal file containing certified copies of relevant documents. However, he failed to include a transcript of the July 20, 2017, bench trial. The State placed Hinton on notice of the transcript's absence in its brief, but he has failed to supplement the record. See Rule 30.04(d). Without this transcript, we are unable to subject Hinton's claim to meaningful review. See Hill, 488 S.W.3d at 160. Therefore, we must dismiss his appeal. Id. CONCLUSION Appeal dismissed.
___________________________________ Lisa White Hardwick, Judge All Concur.
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. Deandre D. Walton, Appellant.(2026)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictFebruary 17, 2026#ED112976
Appellant Deandre Walton appealed his convictions for two counts of first-degree murder, two counts of armed criminal action, and unlawful possession of a firearm, arguing the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress statements and admitting evidence of his statements at trial. The appellate court affirmed the convictions, finding no error in the trial court's denial of the suppression motion.