Opinion
No. 28418.
April 15, 1952. Rehearing Denied May 19, 1952.
APPEAL FROM THE ST. LOUIS COURT OF CRIMINAL CORRECTION, CITY OF ST. LOUIS, LOUIS COMERFORD, J.
No appearance by appellant.
William J. Geekie, Prosecuting Atty. and Jasper R. Vettori, Associate Prosecuting Atty. of St. Louis, for respondent.
This is a proceeding originating in the St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction upon an information charging Marco Shapiro with the offense of failure to file a sales tax return as prescribed by RSMo 1949, Secs. 144.080, 144.100, and 144.480, V.A.M.S.
The statutes which defendant has allegedly violated make the offense a misdemeanor.
The information charged that defendant, on October 15, 1950, was engaged in the business of making retail sales of tangible personal property at 5614 Delmar Boulevard, in the City of St. Louis, and that he had failed and refused to make and file, on or before October 15, 1950, with the Department of Revenue of the State of Missouri, a return for the quarterly period of July, August, and September, 1950, showing the amount of his gross receipts from sales made during such period.
Upon a trial to the court alone, defendant was found guilty as charged, and his punishment fixed at a fine of $250 and imprisonment in the city workhouse for a term of six months.
Defendant has appealed, but has brought up nothing except the record proper, and has filed no brief in this court. Nevertheless it is our duty to review the record proper and render judgment thereon. RSMo 1949, Sec. 547.270, V.A.M.S.; State v. Johnson, Mo.App., 231 S.W.2d 625.
The information charged an offense under the statutes. Defendant was duly arraigned, and having heard the information read, pleaded not guilty. He was personally present throughout the trial and at the time of sentence. The case was tried to the court without a jury, but in the silence of the record we must presume the consent of the parties to such procedure. State v. Finley, 162 Mo.App. 134, 144 S.W. 120; RSMo 1949, Sec. 546.050, V.A.M.S.; Const. of 1945, Art. 1, Sec. 22(a), V.A.M.S. The finding of guilt was responsive to the issues; and the punishment assessed was within the limits of the provisions fixed by law, where, as in this instance, the offense is declared by statute to be a misdemeanor, and no punishment is prescribed by that or any other statute. RSMo 1949, Sec. 556.270, V.A.M.S.
Finding no error in the record, the judgment should be affirmed, and it is so ordered.
ANDERSON and RUDDY, JJ., concur.