State v. Speyer
Decision Date | 10 December 1907 |
Parties | STATE v. SPEYER. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Jackson County; John A. Rich, Special Judge.
John M. Speyer was convicted of murder in the first degree, and appeals. Reversed. and remanded.
W. F. Riggs, for appellant. The Attorney General and John Kennish, for the State.
This is the third appeal by defendant in this cause. On the first trial defendant was convicted of murder in the second degree, and, upon appeal, the judgment was reversed, and the cause remanded. State v. Speyer, 182 Mo. 77, 81 S. W. 430. On the second trial defendant was convicted of murder in the first degree, and, upon appeal, the judgment was reversed, and the cause remanded. State v. Speyer, 194 Mo. 459, 91 S. W. 1075. Upon the third trial the defendant was again convicted of murder in the first degree, from which judgment, after unsuccessful motion for new trial and in arrest of judgment, he appeals.
The facts are fully and fairly stated by Gantt, P. J., in 182 Mo. 77, 81 S. W. 430. If, however, it be thought necessary, other facts developed at this trial will be stated in the course of the opinion. On the second trial of this cause one Margaret Tennis, a young girl upon whom defendant was charged with having made an assault, and for which he was under arrest at the time of the homicide, was permitted to testify over the objection of the defendant, and in passing upon the admissibility of her testimony this court said: 194 Mo., loc. cit. 471, 91 S. W. 1079. This witness did not testify upon the last trial; but it is contended by defendant that this direction of the court was violated in numerous instances by the prosecuting attorney, and that the court erred in permitting John Martin, the police officer in whose custody defendant was at the time of the killing to testify, over defendant's objections, that upon the evening he placed defendant under arrest upon the charge of assaulting the girl, "there was a couple of ladies come up to me * * * So, then I asked this little girl * * * I asked this party [meaning the girl] if this was the man, and she said, `Yes.'" The defendant insists that, under the rule announced, the girl would not have been permitted to testify with reference to anything which might have occurred between her and defendant prior to the homicide, and that these remarks of the officer have reference to the same occurrence, and come under the ruling of this court on the last appeal. We are inclined to take the same view of the matter; but as the defendant himself, on July 24, 1902, in a voluntary written statement with reference to the homicide and the attending facts and circumstances, which statement was read in evidence by the state without objection, alluded to the same charge "as this woman had made against him," we do not think the judgment should be reversed on that ground. But we do not intend to be understood as holding that the facts and circumstances connected with said assault should be admitted in evidence upon another trial, should such be had.
It is also claimed by defendant that the court erred in permitting the state to ask Dr. Glasscock, an expert witness, the following...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Warren
...premeditation, a killing in the cool state of the blood. State v. Snow, 293 Mo. 143, 238 S.W. 1071; State v. Kyles, 247 Mo. 640; State v. Speyer, 207 Mo. 540; State v. Minor, 193 Mo. 597; State v. Silk, 145 Mo. 240; State v. Crabtree, 111 Mo. 136; State v. Gartrell, 171 Mo. 489; State v. Gi......
-
Austin v. United States
...may premeditate without deliberating. Deliberation is only exercised in a `cool state of the blood.' * * *" See also State v. Speyer, 207 Mo. 540, 106 S.W. 505 (1907); Winton v. State, 151 Tenn. 177, 268 S.W. 633 (1925); Torres v. State, 39 N.M. 191, 43 P.2d 929, 931 (1935) ("deliberation *......
-
State v. Creighton
...in the first degree. State v. Hudson, 59 Mo. 135; State v. Jackel, 44 Mo. 234; State v. Saunders, 53 Mo. 234; State v. Speyer, 207 Mo. 540, 106 S.W. 505, 14 L.R.A. (N.S.) 836. In the case of the State v. Weiners, 66 Mo. 24, the court used this language, "Take the case of A and B, who had be......
-
State v. Murphy
... ... and in excluding portions of the opening statement of counsel ... for defense pertaining to such testimony. State v ... Warren, 297 S.W. 401; State v. Porter, 213 Mo ... 43, 111 S.W. 529; State v. Morris, 263 Mo. 348, 172 ... S.W. 603; State v. Speyer, 194 Mo. 471. (a) The ... court erred in excluding testimony of defendant's lay ... witnesses descriptive of defendant's appearance and ... actions and his apparent reaction to the communication of ... threats made by deceased against defendant. State v ... Speyer, 194 Mo. 467; State v ... ...