State v. Ralls5/25/1999
This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.
Missouri Court of Appeals Western District
Appeal From: Circuit Court of Jackson County, Hon. Marco A. Roldan
Citation:
Opinion Vote: TRANSFERRED TO MISSOURI SUPREME COURT. Smart, P.J., and Stith, JJ., concur.
Opinion:
The appellant, Bilah Ralls, was convicted by a jury after a trial before drug court Commissioner Marco Roldan. Mr. Ralls was found guilty of drug trafficking in the second degree, section 195.223, RSMo 1994. Commissioner Roldan sentenced the defendant to ten years imprisonment as a prior offender, section 558.016, RSMo 1994, and as a prior drug offender, section 195.275, RSMo 1994. The defendant appeals from this determination.
The underlying issue, upon which this appeal is based, is whether section 478.466, RSMo Supp. 1996, which purports to confer judicial authority in a drug court commissioner, is in conflict with Art. II, Section 1 and Art. V, Sections 1 and 25(a) of the Missouri Constitution. However, the threshold question raised by the state, is whether the procedural posture of this case will allow us to reach the constitutional issue.
The defendant was arrested at the intersection of 73rd Street and Virginia in Kansas City, Missouri, while in possession of 4.57 grams of crack cocaine. The jury found the defendant guilty. Defense counsel filed a motion for new trial alleging, for the first time, that the drug court lacked jurisdiction because a drug court commissioner, appointed by the circuit court pursuant to section 478.466, was not appointed in accordance with Art. V, Section 25(a) of the Missouri Constitution. Section 25(a) requires the governor appoint all Judges under the nonpartisan selection plan. The post-trial motion was overruled and the defendant timely filed a notice of appeal with this court. The appeal was from Commissioner Roldan's judgment and sentence of January 13, 1998.
The Honorable William F. Mauer, a circuit court Judge in Jackson County, entered an order on January 26, 1998, which stated:
It is hereby ordered that all acts, orders, judgments and decrees of Marco A. Roldan, commissioner of this court, made and entered by him on January 12, 1998, through January 16, 1998, be hereby confirmed. It is so ordered.
On appeal, the defendant raises one point. He complains that in his capacity as a drug court commissioner, Commissioner Roldan lacked jurisdiction to preside over his trial and to sentence him because section 478.466 is unconstitutional. The defendant argues that the selection process of the drug court commissioner violates Article V, Section 25(a), which requires a judicial vacancy in Jackson County to be filled by the governor appointing one of three persons nominated by a nonpartisan judicial commission. Furthermore, he argues that Article V, Section 1 of the Missouri Constitution does not confer judicial power in a drug court commissioner, thus, the statute is an unconstitutional delegation of judicial authority infringing on the principle of separation of powers under Article II, Section 1 of the Missouri Constitution. Finally, the defendant argues that the constitutional defects and the lack of jurisdiction cannot be cured by a "rubber stamp" order of a circuit court Judge confirming the actions of the drug court commissioner.
The state does not address the constitutionality of the statute appointing the drug court commissioner. Instead, it raises two issues that must be resolved before the constitutional issue is taken up. First, it argues that Commissioner Roldan's "judgment" was not a judgm
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Missouri DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|