recaptured); Crawley v. State, 155 S.W.3d 836 (Mo.App.2005) (affirming the motion court’s refusal to hear the defendant’s request for postconviction relief where the defendant escaped before he could be sentenced on a probation violation and remained at large for over eighteen months before being recaptured); State v. Surritte, 35 S.W.3d 873, 875 (Mo.App.2001) (applying the escape rule to refuse to hear the defendant’s direct appeal of his conviction where the defendant es caped for four days causing a 14-day delay in sentencing). Missouri cases take note of the length of the escape, but the more important consideration is whether the application of the rule furthers any of the eight recognized rationales for the rule’s maintenance. See Holmes v. State, 92 S.W.3d 193, 196 (Mo.App.2002) (<HOLDING>); see also Pradt, 219 S.W.3d at 862
holding where there is no duty to defend there is no duty to indemnify recognizing that a claim is an assertion of a right and if there is no assertion of a right there is no claim to deduct holding that there is no threshold amount of time an appellant must have escaped justice before dismissal is allowed holding that a trial court does not lose jurisdiction in a matter by ordering its dismissal before jeopardy has attached unless there is an abuse of discretion in vacating the order of dismissal and reinstating the case for trial holding that it is well settled that there is no constitutional right to an appeal