# Evans v. Missouri Board of Probation & Parole

> Missouri Court of Appeals · May 30, 2006 · 192 S.W.3d 540

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5107072

## Case

- **Full name:** Brian D. EVANS v. MISSOURI BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE
- **Court:** Missouri Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** May 30, 2006
- **Citations:** 192 S.W.3d 540; 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 764
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Judges:** Newton, Smart, Smith
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5107072

## Opinion text

Order
PER CURIAM.
The Missouri Board of Probation and Parole appeals from the declaratory judgment of the Circuit Court of Cole County, Missouri, declaring, pursuant to § 559.115.7, RSMo Supp.2004, that the pri- or 120-day probationary incarceration of the respondent, Brian D. Evans, as authorized by § 559.115.2, following his 2001 conviction, under § 302.321, for driving while his license was suspended or revoked, was not a “previous prison commitment” for purposes of § 558.019.2(1), requiring him to serve a minimum of forty percent of his present sentences.
The appellant raises one point on appeal. It claims that the trial court erroneously declared that, applying § 559.115.7, RSMo Supp.2004 retrospectively, the respondent’s prior 120-day probationary incarceration was not a “previous prison commitment” for purposes of § 558.019.2(1), because § 559.115.7, RSMo Supp.2004, is an amendatory law that, pursuant to § 1.160, could not be applied retrospectively, in that it operated to reduce the respondent’s punishment for his prior conviction of driving while suspended or revoked and was neither a procedural law nor an amendment of § 302.321 creating that offense.
We affirm pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5107072. Public record. Not legal advice.