Penn v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided December 26, 2006

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 2006-12-26

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently October 2008

1 state decisions

Relies on Tooley v. State · Wallingford v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2006-12-26

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

KENNETH W. ROMINES, Judge,

¶1concurring opinion.

¶2I concur in the result reached by Judge Mooney. The Court correctly applies the Missouri Supreme Court cases that control.1

¶3It appears to me that Rule 29.15 is complete unto itself and does not allow an application of Rule 55.03. Rule 29.15 sets out scrivener requirements and time standards which are jurisdictional. These requirements and time standards appear fair and easy of comprehension.

¶4Simply put, I would hold that the court below correctly applied Rule 29.15 and dismissed the cause for failure to comply. I am bound by Tooley and Wallingford and concur.

¶5. See, e.g., Tooley v. State, 20 S.W.3d 519 (Mo. banc 2000); and Wallingford v. State, 131 S.W.3d 781 (Mo. banc 2004).