Home -> Law Blog Directory -> State Law Blogs -> Showmeblawgs

State Law

: Showmeblawgs

By stan_sipple

Missouri Court of Appeals Western District reverses Cole County Circuit Court dismissal of Attorney General's reimbursement claim of incarceration costs against Missouri inmate.
State of Missouri, ex rel., Jeremiah W. Nixon, Attorney General, Appellant, v. Kimberly A. Houston, Respondent: WD67659 Attorney General's good cause belief that the offender has sufficient assets is a condition precedent to the filing of a Missouri Incarceration Reimbursement Act (MIRA ections 217.825 to 217.841) action. State ex rel. Nixon v. Watson, 204 S.W.3d 716, 719 (Mo. App. W.D. 2006), State ex rel. Nixon v. Powell, 167 S.W.3d 702, 704-05 (Mo. banc 2005); State ex rel. Nixon v. Koonce, 173 S.W.3d 277, 283-84 (Mo. App. W.D. 2005). The offender has no basis to attack the State's petition because the State failed to plead or prove "as a prerequisite to recovery," Watson, 204 S.W.3d at 721 (emphasis added), the good cause requirement. An offender may challenge the State's MIRA petition on the basis "'that the Attorney General did not satisfy the conditions precedent of Section 217.831.3 for filing a MIRA petition, while the State does not have to plead and prove good cause to recover, the offender may properly assert a claim that the court lacks jurisdiction to hear the petition because the conditions precedent to the filing of the action were not met. The offenders timely asserted that the trial court lacked jurisdiction because the Attorney General did not have good cause to file the action, and they presented affidavits and other documents in support of their contention. When faced with such a claim, it is incumbent on the Attorney General to demonstrate that the State conducted the thorough investigation contemplated by Section 217.831.2 & 3, and that the good cause required by Section 217.831.3 existed so as to authorize the filing of the MIRA petition. the judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court to determine whether the State had good cause, when it filed its MIRA petition, to believe Respondent had sufficient assets and/or income available and for any further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Full post as published by Showmeblawgs on February 18, 2008 (boomark / email).