midpage

Ex parte Hough

Missouri Court of Appeals
Nov 30, 1976
No. 10541
Reporters:
,
Before:
Billings
BILLINGS, Chief Judge.

In this original proceeding in habeas corpus the petitioner charged he was being unlawfully restrained of his liberty by respondent Sheriff of ‍‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​​​​‌​​​​​‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​​​​​‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​‍Greene County. He alleged he had been charged with contempt in three cases in the Circuit Court of Greene County and was sentenced to three concurrent ninety-day sentences.

Among other things, petitioner contended his imprisonment under the sentences was *334illegal because the purported commitment failed to set forth the particular ‍‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​​​​‌​​​​​‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​​​​​‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​‍circumstances of the offense as required by § 476.-140, RSMo 1969.1

The purported commitment recites the appearance of the parties, that a hearing was conducted on motions for contempt in three cases and concludes: “It is the judgment of the court that Robert Hough be sentenced to Greene County Jail ‍‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​​​​‌​​​​​‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​​​​​‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​‍for a period of ninety (90) days in [each case], said three sentences to run concurrently for total sentence of 90 days.”

Following our issuance of the writ of habeas corpus we scheduled a hearing at which time counsel for respondent admitted the purported commitment was insufficient as ‍‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​​​​‌​​​​​‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​​​​​‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​‍a matter of law.

The requirements of the statute are mandatory in criminal contempt proceedings. Ex parte Brown, 530 S.W.2d 228 (Mo. banc 1975); Ex parte Huff, 516 S.W.2d 778 (Mo.App.1974); In re Randolph, 474 S.W.2d 86 (Mo.App.1971); Glenn v. Hendrix, 349 S.W.2d 532 (Mo.App.1961).

Petitioner ordered discharged.

All concur.

Notes

. “Whenever any person shall be committed for any contempt specified in sections ‍‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​​​​‌​​​​​‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​​​​​‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​‍476.010 to 476.310, the particular circumstances of his offense shall be set forth in the order or warrant of commitment.”

Also see Rule 35.01, V.A.M.R.

Case Details

Case Name: Ex parte Hough
Court Name: Missouri Court of Appeals
Date Published: Nov 30, 1976
Citations: 544 S.W.2d 333; 1976 Mo. App. LEXIS 2287; No. 10541
Docket Number: No. 10541
Court Abbreviation: Mo. Ct. App.
Log In