The Supreme Court of Missouri has rejected an appeal brought before it by a man sentenced to 15 years in prison for a DWI offense in Warren County. Paul Gittemeier, 49, was convicted by a jury in …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
We have recently launched a new and improved website. To continue reading, you will need to either log into your subscriber account, or purchase a new subscription.
If you are a digital subscriber with an active subscription, or you are a print subscriber who had access to our previous wesbite, then you already have an account here. Just reset your password if you have not yet logged in to your account on this new site.
If you are a current print subscriber and did not have a user account on our previous website, you can set up a free website account by clicking here.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
Please log in to continue |
The Supreme Court of Missouri has rejected an appeal brought before it by a man sentenced to 15 years in prison for a DWI offense in Warren County.
Paul Gittemeier, 49, was convicted by a jury in February 2012 for chronic DWI (a Class B felony) and first-degree trespassing for driving an all-terrain vehicle intoxicated on a neighbor’s property, according to court records.
In October 2013, Gittemeier submitted an appeal alleging his attorney provided ineffective assistance because they failed to challenge whether an ATV is a motor vehicle for the purpose of a DWI charge. That appeal was rejected by a court of appeals, before Gittemeier pursued the case to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court reaffirmed the appellate ruling rejecting Gittemeier’s appeal. In an opinion written Sept. 12 by Supreme Court Judge Patricia Breckenridge, Gittemeier failed to support his claim of ineffective assistance.
“Allegations in a postconviction motion are not self-proving,” Breckenridge wrote, saying that during a hearing for the appeal, Gittemeier did not question his attorney about why they failed to challenge whether an ATV is a motor vehicle for the purpose of a DWI charge.
As far as the court is concerned, the failure to pursue that issue during the hearing amounted to an abandonment of the claim, Breckenridge wrote in the court’s opinion.
An expanded version of Gittemeier’s appeal submitted at a later date was not even considered by the Supreme Court, because a private attorney retained by Gittemeier failed to submit the appeal before the legally required due date, according to the court opinion.
DWI