Legal Opinion

Wagner v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided October 4, 2005No. ED 85736PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSherri B. Sullivan, J.

Introduction

Kendrick Wagner (Movant) appeals from the motion court’s judgment dismissing with prejudice his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to the escape rule. We dismiss the appeal pursuant to the escape rule.

Factual and Procedural Background

On October 9, 2003, Movant pled guilty to possession of a controlled substance (modafmil), a class C felony in violation of Section 195.202. 1 At the plea hearing, Movant requested that sentencing be continued until December 12, 2003. The State’s sentencing recommendation was: “If [Movant] appears on time for sentencing on December 12th, the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Nichols v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 2004
  2. Harvey v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 2004
  3. State v. CrumpMissouri Court of Appeals · 2004
  4. State v. BaileyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1993
  5. Kemper v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 2004

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Pradt v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 2007
  2. State v. OreMissouri Court of Appeals · 2006
  3. Pargo v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 2006
  4. State of Missouri v. James E. SpurgeonMissouri Court of Appeals · 2016
  5. State v. BooneMissouri Court of Appeals · 2013

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API