Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

520 S.W.2d 185

State v. Wilmoth

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided February 28, 1975

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 1975-02-28

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently October 1978

1 state decisions

Relies on State v. Camden

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1975-02-28

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1Appellant has purported to appeal from the trial court’s revocation of his probation.

¶2Appellant’s jurisdictional statement states: “Appellant pleaded guilty of tampering with a trailer, a felony .... Imposition of sentence was suspended and defendant was placed on supervised probation. During his probationary period, defendant was arrested and charged with first degree burglary. The Court held a hearing and revoked defendant’s probation and sentenced defendant. This appeal is to contest the correctness of the Court’s revocation order.”

¶3The right of appeal is statutory [Rule 81.01, V.A.M.R.], and § 549.141, RSMo 1969, V.A.M.S., bars our review by direct appeal of the revocation of appellant’s probation. State v. Camden, 514 S.W.2d 181 (Mo.App.1974).

¶4Determining, sua sponte, that we have no appellate jurisdiction, appellant’s appeal is dismissed.

All concur.
/520/sw2d/185 · .json · Public domain