Legal Opinion

STATE OF MISSOURI, Plaintiff-Respondent v. ANNE LOUISE CURRIE

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided June 23, 2014No. SD33207PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMary W. Sheffield, J.

Anne Louise Currie (“Defendant”) appeals from the trial court’s denial of her motion seeking an order nunc pro tunc. Defendant’s arguments are based on the failure to recognize that her case is governed by Section 558.019 1 rather than by Section 558.016 and Section 558.021, RSMo (2000). Because Defendant’s arguments are without merit, we affirm the trial court’s order.

Factual and Procedural Background

In 2001, Defendant was charged with first-degree robbery after she held up a beauty shop at gunpoint. Defendant subsequently pleaded guilty without the benefit of a plea agreement. On August 30,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. CarrollMissouri Court of Appeals · 2006
  2. State v. NormanMissouri Court of Appeals · 2014
  3. Scharnhorst v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1989
  4. State v. KernsMissouri Court of Appeals · 2012
  5. State v. YoungSupreme Court of Missouri · 1950

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. STATE OF MISSOURI v. MONTIA McCAULEYMissouri Court of Appeals · 2016
  2. State of Missouri v. Demetrius C. NelsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 2016
  3. State of Missouri v. Darius MorganMissouri Court of Appeals · 2015

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API