Section 28.39 Post-Revocation Proceedings

• Library: Criminal Practice 2012 Supp

F. (§28.39) Post-Revocation Proceedings

In State v. Wilhite, 492 S.W.2d 397 (Mo. App. S.D. 1973), the court insisted that the sole question on review of revocation is whether the trial judge abused discretion in ordering revocation without due process. In Green v. State, 494 S.W.2d 356 (Mo. banc 1973), the Supreme Court of Missouri determined that filing a habeas corpus petition and not a Rule 27.26 (now repealed) (or Rule 29.15) motion was the proper method to challenge revocation. Because the revocation of probation is not a final judgment rendered upon an indictment or information, no appeal may be taken from the revocation of probation. State v. Stewart, 14 S.W.3d 671 (Mo. App. E.D. 2000) (citing Boyer v. State, 646 S.W.2d 388, 388–89 (Mo. App. E.D. 1983), State v. Henderson, 750 S.W.2d 507, 516 (Mo. App. W.D. 1988), and State v. Vansickle, 774 S.W.2d 583 (Mo. App. E.D. 1989)). See also Reiter v. Camp, 518 S.W.2d 82 (Mo. App. W.D. 1974). But in Brandt v. Percich, 507...