[Download] "William Edward Hulett v. State Missouri" by Supreme Court of Missouri Division 2 * Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: William Edward Hulett v. State Missouri
- Author : Supreme Court of Missouri Division 2
- Release Date : January 28, 1971
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 61 KB
Description
On February 15, 1969, William Edward Hulett, Sr., herein referred to as petitioner, entered a plea of guilty to the charge of issuing a fraudulent check and was sentenced to imprisonment for a term of four years. By his amended motion filed pursuant to Criminal Rule 27.26, V.A.M.R., he alleged that he was entitled to release from confinement because, among other things, he was misled and induced by the prosecuting attorney to plead guilty to a violation of § 561.450 (all statutory references are to RSMo 1969, V.A.M.S.) which makes it a felony to obtain money or property by means of a check drawn, with intent to cheat or defraud, on a bank in which the drawer of the check knows he has no funds. According to petitioner, he at most was guilty of a misdemeanor in that in violation of § 561.460 he issued a check in an amount less than $100 drawn on an account in which he had insufficient funds. After an evidentiary hearing on the motion, the trial court entered its findings of fact and Conclusions of law and found, among other things, that petitioner's ""sentence was not imposed in violation of the Constitution and laws of this state or the United States; that the Court imposing the sentence had jurisdiction so to do and that the sentence was not in excess of the maximum sentence authorized by law."" Following the above Conclusions of law the trial court entered this order: ""However, this court believes that the sentence, under all the circumstances of this case, was more severe than the sentences usually assessed in similar cases and on like charges, and for that reason alone now amends the sentence to two (2) years, which shall revert back to February 15, 1969, the date of the original sentencing."" The State of Missouri has appealed. Petitioner did not appeal from the adverse ruling on the merits of his motion.