State v. Hotze, 250 S.W.3d 745 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008). · Go Syfert
State v. Hotze, 250 S.W.3d 745 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
14 citation events (14 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Wolf v. Morriss
E.D. Mo. · 2021 · confidence medium
For a Missouri defendant, a “judgment becomes final for purposes of appeal when the judgment and sentence are entered.” State v. Hotze, 250 S.W.3d 745, 746 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008) (citing State v. Welch, 865 S.W.2d 434, 435 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Angela L. Brown v. State of Missouri
Mo. Ct. App. · 2020 · confidence medium
See State v. Whipple, 501 S.W.3d 506, 522 (Mo. App. E.D. 2016) (dismissing defendant’s appeal and stating the remedy in the case of SIS is “by extraordinary writ”); State v. Moore, 352 S.W.3d 392, 398 (Mo. App. E.D. 2011) (same); State v. Hotze, 250 S.W.3d 745, 746-47 (Mo. App. E.D. 2008) (same); State v. Palm, 158 S.W.3d 861, 861 (Mo. App. E.D. 2005) (same); State v. Mohammed, 131 S.W.3d 848, 848 (Mo. App. E.D. 2004) (dismissing defendant’s appeal and stating “[t]he appropriate remedy for seeking review of the denial of a motion to withdraw a guilty plea when the imposition of sente…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State of Missouri v. Dustin Demont Brown
Mo. Ct. App. · 2019 · confidence medium
The jury was instructed on Count I, the resisting arrest charge, by Instruction No. 8, the verdict director submitted by the State: As to Count I, if you find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt: 2 Section 565.083 was repealed in 2014, effective January 1, 2017. 3 Section 565.070 was transferred in 2014, effective January 1, 2017, to section 565.054. 4 See State v. Hotze, 250 S.W.3d 745, 746 (Mo. App. E.D. 2008), citing State v. Lynch, 679 S.W.2d 858, 860 (Mo. banc 1984)). 3 First, that on August 22, 2015, in the County of Randolph, State of Missouri, Andrew Jones and Jason…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State of Missouri v. Richard John Whipple (2×) also: Cited "see"
Mo. Ct. App. · 2016 · confidence medium
State v. Moore, 352 S.W.3d 392, 398 (Mo. App. E.D. 2011); State v. Hotze, 250 S.W.3d 745, 746-47 (Mo. App. E.D. 2008).
cited Cited as authority (rule) State v. Paul
Mo. Ct. App. · 2013 · confidence medium
State v. Hotze, 250 S.W.3d 745, 746 (Mo.App.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Johnston v. State
Mo. Ct. App. · 2013 · confidence medium
“In a criminal case, the judgment becomes final for purposes of appeal when the judgment and sentence are entered.” State v. Hotze, 250 S.W.3d 745, 746 (Mo.App.
cited Cited as authority (rule) State v. Moore
Mo. Ct. App. · 2011 · confidence medium
State v. Hotze, 250 S.W.3d 745, 746 (Mo.App.
cited Cited as authority (rule) State v. Bracken
Mo. Ct. App. · 2010 · signal: cf. · confidence medium
See State v. Welch, 865 S.W.2d 434, 435 (Mo.App. *53 E.D.1993); cf. State v. Hotze, 250 S.W.3d 745, 746 (Mo.App.
cited Cited "see" State of Missouri v. Monica C. Shoemaker
Mo. Ct. App. · 2023 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Hotze, 250 S.W.3d 745, 746 (Mo. App. E.D. 2008).
cited Cited "see" Daniel McKay v. State of Missouri
Mo. Ct. App. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Hotze, 250 S.W.3d 745, 746 (Mo. App. E.D. 2008).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent,
v.
Eric HOTZE, Defendant/Appellant
ED 90531.
Missouri Court of Appeals.
Feb 19, 2008.
250 S.W.3d 745
William P. Grant, St. Louis, MO, for appellant., Shaun J. MacKelprang, Asst. Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Patricia L. Cohen.
Cited by 10 opinions  |  Published
PATRICIA L. COHEN, Chief Judge.

Eric Hotze (Defendant) was convicted of third degree assault. The court suspended imposition of sentence and placed Defendant on probation for two years with conditions. Defendant has now filed his notice of appeal from this judgment of conviction. We dismiss the appeal.

The criminal appeals statutes limit the right of appeal to final judgments. Section 547.070, RSMo 2000. In a criminal case, the judgment becomes final for purposes of appeal when the judgment and sentence are entered. State v. Welch, 865 S.W.2d 434, 435 (Mo.App. E.D.1993). Therefore, when imposition of the sentence is suspended, the judgment is not final and a defendant may not appeal it. State v. Lynch, 679 S.W.2d 858, 860 (Mo. banc 1984); See also, State v. Larson, 79 S.W.3d 891, 892 (Mo. banc 2002). Here, the court suspended imposition of Defendant’s sentence. As a result, there is no final, ap-pealable judgment.

Where there is no final, appealable judgment, we have no jurisdiction to consider the appeal. State v. Palm, 158 S.W.3d 861 (Mo.App. E.D.2005). We issued an order to Defendant directing him to show cause why his appeal should not be dismissed. Defendant has filed a response. Defendant argues there are collateral punitive consequences to his conviction, even though imposition of his sentence was suspended. As a result, Defendant contends he should be allowed to file an appeal. He further argues that section 547.070 does not define “final judgment” and that any definition is solely one of judicial interpretation, which he contends this Court can reevaluate at its discretion.

The Missouri Supreme Court in Lynch discussed the collateral consequences of a conviction, even though imposition of sentence is suspended. However, the Court ultimately concluded that despite the collateral consequences, there was no final, appealable judgment. Lynch, 679 S.W.2d at 861-62. This position has been reiterated by the Supreme Court recently in State v. Larson, 79 S.W.3d 891, 893 (Mo. banc 2002), where the Court, citing Lynch, stated, “In a criminal case, a final judgment occurs only when a sentence is entered.” This Court, which is a court under the superintending authority of the Missouri Supreme Court, is bound by the decisions of that Supreme Court. Mo. Const. Art. V, See. 2 (1945). Defendant’s remedy, if any, when the imposition[*747] of sentence is suspended is only by an extraordinary writ. State v. Mohammed, 131 S.W.3d 848 (Mo.App. E.D.2004).

Defendant’s appeal is dismissed without prejudice for lack of a final, appealable judgment.

BOOKER T. SHAW and NANNETTE A. BAKER, JJ., concur.