State ex rel. Stimel v. White
2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 498
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Relator Cory Stimel seeks a permanent writ of prohibition to bar Respondent Judge White from revoking Stimel's probation and to dismiss pending revocation proceedings.
- Stimel pled guilty to stealing on January 5, 2009 in Phelps County; probation was for two years supervised by OCCS with various costs, restitution, and a suspended imposition of sentence.
- A probation review was scheduled multiple times (March 6, 2009; October 9, 2009; October 8, 2010; December 10, 2010) with findings of compliance noted, and evidence of a suspended probation and a later violation report for nonpayment and nonreporting.
- Stimel's probation expired January 5, 2011; no revocation motion, warrants, or hearings had been scheduled before expiration, and the only notation of suspension appeared in a docket entry by Respondent.
- On January 18, 2011 the State filed a Motion to Revoke Probation; Stimel filed a Writ of Prohibition on October 27, 2011; a preliminary prohibition was issued November 10, 2011, and this Court made the writ permanent.
- The central question is whether Respondent had authority to conduct a revocation hearing after probation expiration, given § 559.036, and whether there was an affirmative manifestation of intent to hold a revocation hearing prior to expiration.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authority to revoke after expiration | Stimel contends no authority once probation expires. | Respondent argues revocation power extends for adjudication period with proper manifest intent and notification. | No authority to revoke post-expiration; prohibition affirmed. |
| Affirmative manifestation before expiration | There must be an affirmative manifestation prior to expiration (e.g., filings/hearings) to preserve authority. | Affirmative manifestation may be shown by scheduling or other steps leading to a revocation hearing. | There was no sufficient affirmative manifestation before expiration; authority did not exist. |
| Effect of expiration on ongoing proceedings | Once probation expires, the court has no power over the probationer for revocation. | Some authority may extend to adjudication if properly manifested. | After expiration, no authority to act; writ granted. |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Connett v. Dickerson, 833 S.W.2d 471 (Mo.App.1992) (affirmative manifestation necessary for revocation hearing before expiration)
- State ex rel. Cline v. Wall, 37 S.W.3d 877 (Mo.App.2001) (prior hearings and notices show sufficiency of manifest intent before expiration)
- Williams v. State, 927 S.W.2d 903 (Mo.App.1996) (suspension and warrant prior to expiration can indicate manifest intent)
- Starry v. State, 318 S.W.3d 780 (Mo.App.2010) (after expiration, circuit court has no authority over probationer)
- Stelljes v. State, 72 S.W.3d 196 (Mo.App.2002) (probation authority ends upon expiration absent proper extension)