State v. Sharp
2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 738
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Sharp was convicted by bench trial of second-degree assault on a corrections officer and sentenced to four years, concurrent with a prior sentence.
- Terri Krull, a corrections officer, testified Sharp extinguished a lit cigarette on her hand, causing a blister.
- The State charged Sharp under section 565.060 (preliminary count) and later under amended count 565.082 alleging assault on a corrections officer.
- Sharp filed a pro se UMDDL speedy-trial request in November 2008; a detainer was not yet lodged.
- A detainer was filed December 24, 2008; defense counsel did not renew a speedy-trial request after that.
- The trial court denied Sharp’s dismissal motion and later found Sharp guilty on the amended count, which the court later reversed and remanded for resentencing on a lesser offense.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| UMDDL timing and compliance | Sharp complied by a premature request | No detainer existed when request filed; no compliance | Premature request premature; no 180-day trigger; UMDDL dismissed. |
| Statutory basis for counts (pre- vs post-amendment 565.082) | Pre-amendment statute included protections for officers | Corrections officer not listed in 2007 statute; cannot convict | Count II reversed; statute did not cover corrections officers in 2007. |
| Sufficiency and form of conviction | Conviction valid under amended information | Amended charge retrospectively mislabels target | Conviction for second-degree assault reversed; remanded for third-degree assault as lesser included offense. |
Key Cases Cited
- Burnes v. State, 92 S.W.3d 342 (Mo.App. 2003) (detainer requirement; premature request does not trigger UMDDL protections)
- Branstetter v. State, 107 S.W.3d 465 (Mo.App. 2003) (detainer vs. habeas ad prosequendum; director's certification issues)
- Suitor v. Stremel, 968 S.W.2d 221 (Mo.App. 1998) (substantial compliance where prosecutor accepts; certification issues)
- State v. Merrick, 219 S.W.3d 281 (Mo.App. 2007) (burden to prove prosecutor received request; UMDDL compliance)
- Wahby, 775 S.W.2d 147 (Mo. Banc. 1989) (statutory interpretation; plain meaning governs)