State v. Pesce, 325 S.W.3d 565

Pesce was charged in Buchanan County with possession of a controlled substance (meth) under §195.202; an amended information alleged she was a persistent offender under §558.016 based on two or more felonies at different times.
Before trial, Pesce moved to suppress the meth as unlawfully seized during an alleged illegal detention; the trial court denied the motion.
A jury convicted Pesce of the sole count, and she was sentenced on September 21, 2009, to five years as a prior and persistent offender.
During a suppression hearing, Trooper Gilliland testified Pesce was detained for a traffic stop for careless and imprudent driving; a license suspension was revealed; a consent-to-search was obtained and the trunk contained meth.
On appeal, Pesce argued the continued detention beyond initial investigation rendered the search invalid; the court applied de novo review for Fourth Amendment questions and held the detention was part of a reasonable traffic-violation investigation.
The court also addressed the sentencing issue, concluding Pesce’s Iowa conviction for theft in the third degree was an aggravated misdemeanor that constitutes both a felony and a misdemeanor under §556.016, applying the rule of lenity, and amended the judgment to five years as a prior offender; the overall conviction was affirmed as amended.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether consent to search was valid during a traffic-stop investigation	Pesce contends continued detention after license/registration checks made consent invalid	State argues consent was obtained during a reasonable investigation of the traffic violation	No error; search valid as part of a reasonable investigation and voluntary consent
Whether Pesce could be sentenced as a persistent offender based on an Iowa aggravated misdemeanor conviction	Second conviction not a felony under Missouri law, so no persistent-offender status	Iowa aggravated misdemeanor can qualify as both felony and misdemeanor under §556.016	Trial court erred in designating persistent offender; but proper sentence as a prior offender within range remained; §30.23 amendment entered

State v. Sund, 215 S.W.3d 719 (Mo. banc 2007) (Fourth Amendment suppression standard; stop concluded before access to trunk)
State v. Pike, 162 S.W.3d 464 (Mo. banc 2005) (Review of suppression rulings; consider hearing and trial record)
State v. Werner, 9 S.W.3d 590 (Mo. banc 2000) (Definition of seizure; free-to-leave standard)
State v. Brand, 309 S.W.3d 887 (Mo. App. W.D.2010) (Warrantless searches; consent exceptions)
State v. Woolfolk, 3 S.W.3d 823 (Mo. App. W.D.1999) (Consent to search valid; need not be written)
State v. Granado, 148 S.W.3d 309 (Mo. banc 2004) (Routine traffic stop; proportional detention for investigation)
State v. Barks, 128 S.W.3d 513 (Mo. banc 2004) (Reasonable duration of traffic-stop investigation)
State v. Grubb, 120 S.W.3d 737 (Mo. banc 2003) (Felony/misdemeanor status under §556.016 determined by designation and sentence)
State v. Simmons, 270 S.W.3d 523 (Mo. App. W.D.2008) (Statutory interpretation; plain-language approach)
State v. Heistand, 714 S.W.2d 842 (Mo. App. S.D.1986) (Remains applicable to persistent-offender designation when offenses are ambiguously categorized)
State v. Teer, 275 S.W.3d 258 (Mo. banc 2009) (Jury sentencing rights for persistent-offender designation)