Aggravated, chronic, persistent and prior offenders, when
This law explains how a court decides if someone charged with a drunk driving crime (or boating while intoxicated) has done it before. If the paperwork lists the past offenses, evidence proves those past offenses, and the judge agrees, the court labels that person as a repeat offender. In a jury trial, the jury never hears about this — the judge decides it separately. Being labeled a repeat offender means the judge, not the jury, decides the punishment.
577.023. Aggravated, chronic, persistent and s, when — trial procedures — sentencing . — 1. A court shall find the to be a prior offender, , , , , , , , , or if:
(1) The or information, original or amended, or the all essential facts ing a finding that the defendant is a prior offender, prior boating offender, persistent offender, persistent boating offender, aggravated offender, aggravated boating offender, chronic offender, chronic boating offender, habitual offender, or habitual boating offender; and
(2) Evidence is introduced that establishes sufficient facts to warrant a finding the defendant is a prior offender, prior boating offender, persistent offender, persistent boating offender, aggravated offender, aggravated boating offender, chronic offender, chronic boating offender, habitual offender, or habitual boating offender; and
(3) The court makes that warrant a finding beyond a reasonable doubt by the court that the defendant is a prior offender, prior boating offender, persistent offender, persistent boating offender, aggravated offender, aggravated boating offender, chronic offender, chronic boating offender, habitual offender, or habitual boating offender.
2. In a jury trial, the defendant's status as a prior offender, prior boating offender, persistent offender, persistent boating offender, aggravated offender, aggravated boating offender, chronic offender, chronic boating offender, habitual offender, or habitual boating offender shall be found prior to to the jury outside of its .
3. In a trial without a jury or upon a , a of the defendant's status as a prior offender, prior boating offender, persistent offender, persistent boating offender, aggravated offender, aggravated boating offender, chronic offender, chronic boating offender, habitual offender, or habitual boating offender may be made by the court at any time prior to sentencing.
4. Evidence offered as of the defendant's status as a prior offender, prior boating offender, persistent offender, persistent boating offender, aggravated offender, aggravated boating offender, chronic offender, chronic boating offender, habitual offender or habitual boating offender shall include but not be limited to evidence of received by a search of the s of the , including criminal history records from the or records from the driving while tracking system (DWITS) maintained by the Missouri state patrol, or the driving record maintained by the Missouri . Any findings of guilt used to establish the defendant's status as a prior offender, prior boating offender, persistent offender, persistent boating offender, aggravated offender, aggravated boating offender, chronic offender, chronic boating offender, habitual offender or habitual boating offender shall be prior to the date of of the present .
5. The defendant shall be accorded full rights of and , with the opportunity to present evidence, at such hearings.
6. The defendant may proof of the facts used to prove his or her status as a prior offender, prior boating offender, persistent offender, persistent boating offender, aggravated offender, aggravated boating offender, chronic offender, chronic boating offender, habitual offender, or habitual boating offender.
7. If a court finds the defendant to be a prior offender, prior boating offender, persistent offender, persistent boating offender, aggravated offender, aggravated boating offender, chronic offender, chronic boating offender, habitual offender, or habitual boating offender, the court shall not instruct the jury as to the range of punishment or allow the jury, upon a , to and declare the punishment as part of its .
8. At sentencing, all parties shall be permitted to present additional information bearing on the of the sentence. Nothing in this section shall prevent the use of presentence investigations, sentencing reports or commitments.
Tap any gold-underlined word to see what it means.
Source & history notes
(L. 1982 S.B. 513, A.L. 1983 S.B. 318 & 135, A.L. 1991 S.B. 125 & 341, A.L. 1993 S.B. 167 merged with S.B. 180, A.L. 1998 S.B. 634, A.L. 2001 H.B. 302 & 38, A.L. 2005 H.B. 353 merged with H.B. 972 and S.B. 37, et al. merged with H.B. 353, A.L. 2005 1st Ex. Sess. H.B. 2, A.L. 2008 H.B. 1715, A.L. 2008 H.B. 1715 merged with S.B. 930 & 947, A.L. 2009 H.B. 62, A.L. 2010 H.B. 1695, et al., A.L. 2011 H.B. 199, A.L. 2012 S.B. 480, A.L. 2014 S.B. 491) Effective 1-01-17 (1984) Sentence enhancement provisions do not violate constitutional proscription against ex post facto laws. (Mo.banc) State v. Acton, 665 S.W.2d 618. (1991) Where defendant was convicted of intoxication-related traffic offenses in violation of laws of other states, such convictions may be used for enhancement purposes as persistent offender. Phrase "in violation of state law" bars use of municipal ordinance convictions for enhancement. State v. Ryan, 813 S.W.2d 898 (Mo. App.S.D.). (1997) Intoxication-related traffic offense includes a guilty plea to a DWI in violation of a municipal ordinance with a suspended imposition of sentence. State v. Meggs, 950 S.W.2d 608 (Mo.App.S.D.). (1997) A blood alcohol content conviction pursuant to municipal ordinance can be used as evidence to enhance punishment. State v. Haskins, 950 S.W.2d 613 (Mo.App.S.D.).
Legal information, not legal advice. Always confirm with the official source at revisor.mo.gov.