Title: State ex rel. Fite v. Honorable Laura Johnson
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: SC96474
State: Missouri
Issuer: Missouri Supreme Court
Date: October 31, 2017

SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI 
en banc 
STATE ex rel. AMY J. FITE,  
) 
Christian County Prosecuting Attorney, 
) 
) 
Relator, 
) 
) 
v. 
) 
No. SC96474 
) 
THE HONORABLE LAURA JOHNSON, 
) 
) 
Respondent. 
) 
and 
STATE OF MISSOURI, 
) 
) 
Appellant, 
) 
) 
v.  
) 
No. SC96664 
) 
ROBBY LEDFORD, 
) 
) 
Respondent. 
) 
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN PROHIBITION 
Amy J. Fite, the Christian County Prosecuting Attorney, filed a petition for a writ 
of prohibition alleging the circuit court exceeded its authority by sustaining Robby 
Ledford's Rule 29.07(d) motion to withdraw his plea of guilty to felony stealing pursuant 
to § 570.030.3(1)1 and resentencing him as a misdemeanor offender.  Ledford's claim is 
1 Statutory citations are to RSMo Supp. 2013.
Opinion issued October 31, 2017
2 
 
procedurally defaulted and substantively meritless.  This Court's preliminary writ of 
prohibition is made permanent.  
Facts and Procedural Background 
In 2013, Ledford pleaded guilty to stealing property worth more than $500 but less 
than $25,000.  Pursuant to § 570.030.3(1), the circuit court sentenced Ledford as a felon to 
five years' imprisonment, suspended imposition of the sentence, and placed him on 
probation for five years. 
 
In November 2015, the circuit court revoked Ledford's probation, executed his 
sentence, and delivered him to the custody of the Department of Corrections.  Ledford did 
not appeal, nor did he file a Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief.  
 
In February 2017, after expiration of the period for filing a timely Rule 24.035 
motion for post-conviction relief, Ledford filed the underlying Rule 29.07(d) motion to 
withdraw his guilty plea.2  Ledford claimed his conviction and sentence for felony stealing 
were unlawful and constituted manifest injustice pursuant to State v. Bazell, 497 S.W.3d 
263 (Mo. banc 2016).  Ledford argued Bazell applies retroactively and holds that stealing 
in violation of § 570.030.1 is a class A misdemeanor, not a felony.  The circuit court 
sustained Ledford's motion, issued an order amending the stealing charge from a felony to 
                                                          
 
2 Rule 24.035(b) provides, if no appeal is taken from the judgment or sentence, a motion for post-
conviction relief following a guilty plea "shall be filed within 180 days of the date the person is 
delivered to the custody of the department of corrections." 
3 
 
a class A misdemeanor, and resentenced him to one year in the county jail with credit for 
time served.3  The State filed the instant writ petition and a notice of appeal.4    
Standard of Review 
This Court has jurisdiction to issue original remedial writs.  Mo. Const. art. V, sec. 
4.1.  "A writ of prohibition is appropriate: (1) to prevent the usurpation of judicial power 
when a lower court lacks authority or jurisdiction; (2) to remedy an excess of authority, 
jurisdiction or abuse of discretion where the lower court lacks the power to act as intended; 
or (3) where a party may suffer irreparable harm if relief is not granted."  State ex rel. 
Strauser v. Martinez, 416 S.W.3d 798, 801 (Mo. banc 2014).   
The Circuit Court Lacked Authority 
 A criminal judgment becomes final when a sentence is entered.  State v. Larson, 79 
S.W.3d 891, 893 (Mo. banc 2002).  "[O]nce judgment and sentencing occur in a criminal 
proceeding, the trial court has exhausted its jurisdiction.  It can take no further action in 
that case except when otherwise expressly provided by statute or rule."  State ex rel. 
Simmons v. White, 866 S.W.2d 443, 445 (Mo. banc 1993).  This Court has recognized Rule 
29.07(d) provides for a post-sentence civil matter.  See Brown v. State, 66 S.W.3d 721, 
724–25, 730 n.5 (Mo. banc 2002).  Therefore, the circuit court had jurisdiction to adjudicate 
Ledford's Rule 29.07(d) motion as a civil matter.  See Mo. Const. art. V, sec. 14(a).     
                                                          
 
3 The sentence for a class A misdemeanor cannot exceed one year.  Section 558.011.1(5). 
4 This Court issued a preliminary writ of prohibition and, pursuant to Rule 83.01, transferred the 
appeal to this Court prior to opinion by the court of appeals.  State v. Ledford, SC96664.   Because 
this Court's writ is made permanent, the appeal is dismissed. 
 
4 
 
The circuit court lacked authority, however, to sustain the motion.5  Because 
Ledford pleaded guilty, his claims for post-conviction relief are governed by Rule 24.035.  
Rule 24.035(a) "provides the exclusive procedure" to seek relief for the claims enumerated 
in the rule.  Brown, 66 S.W.3d at 727.  Rule 24.035, therefore, was the exclusive procedure 
by which Ledford could have collaterally attacked the final judgment based on his claim 
his sentence exceeds the maximum sentence authorized by law.  Ledford's claim is 
procedurally defaulted due to his failure to file a Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction 
relief. 
Contrary to the circuit court's order, Rule 29.07(d) does not provide an independent 
basis for reviewing procedurally defaulted claims for post-conviction relief.   Brown, 66 
S.W.3d at 730.  Rule 29.07(d) provides: 
A motion to withdraw a plea of guilty may be made only before 
sentence is imposed or when imposition of sentence is suspended; but 
to correct manifest injustice the court after sentence may set aside the 
judgment of conviction and permit the defendant to withdraw his plea. 
 
Rule 29.07(d) does not apply to claims enumerated within Rule 24.035.  Brown, 66 S.W.3d 
at 730 n.5.  Ledford's claim that his sentence was in excess of the maximum authorized by 
law was within the purview of Rule 24.035; therefore, Rule 29.07(d) has no application.  
The circuit court lacked authority to grant relief pursuant to Rule 29.07(d).  
The circuit court's error is compounded by the fact Ledford's claim is substantively 
meritless.  Section 570.030.3(1) purports to enhance the offense of stealing from a 
                                                          
 
5  Authority concerns a court's power to render a particular judgment or take a particular action in 
a particular case based on the existing law, while jurisdiction concerns a court's power to render 
any judgment or take any action in a particular case.  See J.C.W. ex rel. Webb v. Wyciskalla, 275 
S.W.3d 249, 253–54 (Mo. banc 2009); In re Marriage of Hendrix, 183 S.W.3d 582, 588 (Mo. banc 
2006).   
5 
 
misdemeanor to a felony when "the value of property or services is an element" and the 
value of the stolen property or services exceeds $500 but is less than $25,000.  The value 
of the stolen property or services, however, "is not an element of the offense of stealing."  
Bazell, 497 S.W.3d at 266.  Although State v. Passley, 389 S.W.3d 180, 182–83 (Mo. App. 
2012), held stealing is a felony when the value of the stolen property exceeds $500, Bazell 
held this interpretation "should no longer be followed" because the felony enhancement 
does not apply to the offense of stealing as defined by § 570.030.1.  Bazell, 497 S.W.3d at 
267 n.3; State v. Smith, 522 S.W.3d 221, 230 (Mo. banc 2017).  As this Court held in State 
ex rel. Windeknecht v. Mesmer, SC96159, -- S.W.3d -- (Mo. banc Oct. 5, 2017), this Court's 
interpretation of § 570.030.3(1) first enunciated in Bazell applies prospectively only, 
except in those cases pending on direct appeal.6  The circuit court's order erroneously 
assumed Bazell applies retroactively.  Ledford's claim, therefore, is both procedurally 
defaulted and substantively meritless.  
Conclusion 
The circuit court lacked authority to amend the information and resentence Ledford 
to a misdemeanor.  The preliminary writ of prohibition is made permanent.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
_______________________ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Zel M. Fischer, Chief Justice 
 
All concur.  
 
                                                          
 
6 Section 570.030 has been amended and, effective January 1, 2017, no longer contains the 
same language addressed in Passley and Bazell.