Hoskins v. State, 2010 Mo. LEXIS 212

Hoskins had three prior felonies with suspended executions during probation.
First sentencing (June 2007) imposed 15 years for first-degree burglary with suspended execution during probation.
Second sentencing (July 2007) imposed 7 years each for second-degree burglary and stealing, with both suspended during probation.
Hoskins violated probation via new offenses and is sentenced to a 15-year term to be executed and seven-year terms for the other offenses, with specific consecutive and concurrent arrangements.
The court entered plea-negotiation considerations with the prosecutor as part of the sentencing decisions.
Hoskins filed a Rule 24.035 motion alleging improper plea negotiations; he appealed after the motion was denied.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether plain error review applies to Rule 24.035 motions.	Hoskins seeks plain error review of the sentencing orders.	State contends plain error review does not apply to Rule 24.035 appeals.	No plain error review in Rule 24.035 appeals.
Whether a claim not raised in Rule 24.035 motion can be reviewed on appeal.	Hoskins argues for appellate consideration of a new statutory-authority claim.	State asserts waiver of any unraised claim under Rule 24.035(d).	Waived; cannot be reviewed on appeal.

Edwards v. State, 215 S.W.3d 292 (Mo. App. 2007) (clarifies suspension of sentence vs. imposition and consequences on probation)
In re the Marriage of Hendrix, 183 S.W.3d 582 (Mo. banc 2006) (limits use of jurisdiction concept to constitutional context)
Webb v. Wyciskalla, 275 S.W.3d 249 (Mo. banc 2009) (confirms jurisdictional discussions stay in constitutional context)
State ex rel. Nixon v. Daugherty, 186 S.W.3d 253 (Mo. banc 2006) (civil procedure rules prevail when conflicting with post-conviction rules)
Searcy v. State, 981 S.W.2d 597 (Mo. App. 1999) (review of trial court's jurisdictional or sentencing decisions under post-conviction)