Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

912 S.W.2d 610

State v. Murray

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided October 31, 1995

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 1995-10-31

Relies on State v. Winters

Decided 1995-10-31

¶1ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2Appeal from conviction of stealing, third offense, § 570.040, RSMo 1994; appeal of sentence as persistent offender, § 558.016.3, RSMo 1994, of ten years imprisonment and appeal of denial of Rule 29.15 motion for postconviction relief.

¶3Judgment of conviction and sentence affirmed. Rule 84.16(b) and Rule 30.25(b).

¶4Nonetheless, this cause is remanded for entry of an order nunc pro tunc under Rule 29.12(c) to correct an error in the trial court’s written judgment. See State v. Winters, 900 S.W.2d 636, 641 (Mo.App.1995). The written judgment erroneously shows that Murray was found guilty of felony stealing over $150. The second amended information, however, charged Murray with felony stealing, third offense, § 570.040, RSMo 1994, and a guilty verdict was returned by the jury on the charge. The case, therefore, is remanded for the entry of an order to reflect that Murray was found guilty of stealing, third offense, rather than stealing over $150.

/912/sw2d/610 · .json · Public domain