Woods v. StateWoods v. State
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Per Curiam
Terry J. Woods stole clothing from a retailer. He was charged under
Woods filed a motion pursuant to Rule 24.035, claiming his sentence exceeded the maximum sentence prescribed by law. He argued
Standard of Review
This Court’s review of a denial of post-conviction relief is limited to a determination of whether the findings and conclusions of the trial court are clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). The trial court’s findings and conclusions are clearly erroneous only if, after a review of the entire record, the appellate court is left .with the definite and firm impression that a mistake has been made. State v. Ervin, 835 S.W.2d 905, 928 (Mo. banc 1992).
Discussion
Woods pleaded guilty to the crime of stealing. Under section 570.030 this is a class A misdemeanor unless another penalty is prescribed.
3
The state charged that
In addition, the rule of lenity gives a criminal defendant the benefit of a lesser penalty where there is an ambiguity in the statute allowing for more than one interpretation.
State v. Rowe,
63 S.W.3d 647, 650 (Mo. banc 2002).
Conclusion
The motion court clearly erred in finding that
As Woods may have served a sentence longer than that authorized for a class A misdemeanor, any motion for rehearing must be filed on or before 1:00 p.m., December 9, 2005.
All concur.
Notes
. This Court granted transfer of this appeal from the court of appeals after opinion by that court.
. All statutory citations are to RSMo 2000 unless otherwise noted. Section 570.040.1 provides:
Every person who has previously pled guilty or been found guilty on two separate occasions of stealing, and who subsequently pleads guilty or is found guilty of stealing is guilty of a class C felony and shall be punished accordingly.
.Section 570.030.8 provides: “Any violation of this section for which no other penalty is specified in this section is a class A misdemeanor.”