Archibald v. State
| Decision Date | 19 June 1961 |
| Docket Number | No. 4330,4330 |
| Citation | 362 P.2d 721,77 Nev. 301 |
| Parties | Thayne H. ARCHIBALO, Appellant, v. STATE of Nevada, Respondent. |
| Court | Nevada Supreme Court |
Alexander A. Garroway, Robert Leland, Reno, for appellant.
Roger D. Foley, Atty. Gen., William J. Raggio, Dist. Atty., Herbert F. Ahlswede, Deputy Dist. Atty., Reno, for respondent.
Appellant pleaded guilty to murder and after a hearing by a three-judge court to determine degree and punishment pursuant to NRS 200.030, the court concluded that appellant was guilty of murder in the first degree, fixed the penalty at death, and entered its judgment accordingly.
Appeal is from such judgment.
The evidence presented at the hearing showed that appellant on August 26, 1959 robbed one Waters, a 17-year-old service station attendant, in Livermore, California, kidnaped him and drove him east of Sparks, Nevada, where appellant killed him by shooting him in the back of the head. Thereafter, appellant stretched the victim out on the ground and shot him again in the back of the head to make sure he was dead. The evidence was mainly obtained from confessions of appellant and from his oral testimony in court.
It is not contended that the confessions were involuntary nor is the sanity of appellant questioned on appeal. His counsel argues, however, that the killing was an impulsive act and that there was not a sufficient showing of premeditation.
One version of the shooting as given by the appellant is that when the car stopped east of Sparks, the victim suddenly bolted from the car and started to run; appellant then, without thinking, impulsively shot at Waters. The other version given by him was that appellant took Waters up to a narrow ledge off the road where, after giving some thought to the situation, he determined to and did kill Waters by shooting him twice.
A letter written by appellant after his apprehension to Mr. Raggio, the District Attorney, in itself establishes premeditation:
'Mr. Razzo, you hurt my feelings today. I also discovered that there is a squawk box planted in the jail. You also crushed my ego when you cut up the idea of me writing my little book to convince the public that I am only a misjudged good kid.
'I like you, Razzo. You have got class and a smart way of getting a defenseless kid like me to melt like butter. You are too easy and considering. No kidding, I really like you. I guess I admire you. I like the Assistant D. A. He is a little strict but he is all right. Two people I should fear but I like you.
'I tell you what, my whole life has been centered around writing that book 'A Teenage Desire'. It has been the plot of my life. Seriously, Razzo, I lived and breathed so I could write it. I have lived and dreamed, robbed and murdered. Then what happened? You laugh at me. I got back here to the jail and blew my top. I said things I never meant in the least. Tried to make an impression on the boys. Sure, it is silly. I am smart enough to realize it. I act dumb sometimes.
'Look, Mr. Razzo, you have got the story all wrong. Very little of it is the truth. I lied a lifetime just so I could write all the facts, write the truth, be the hero in my book. I studied day and night while I was in prison so I would be prepared for my exit, be the brave one and know all the answers. What happens? A stiff-collared, smooth-talking D. A. breaks my back. You should feel real good. Appreciate your character, because you and Janice (my girl friend) are the only people who have been able to get the truth out of me.
'Your lie detector test don't work with me. I can control my blood pressure and temperatures enough to make your machine mad. I wouldn't take one anyway. They are silly and embarrassing.
'Know something, Mr. Razzo, if I had taken the time to get rid of those empty cartridges by the body and got rid of the gun and kept my mouth shut you people would have never had connected me with that murder in a million years. You have got to give me that much credit. I planned this to the split second. And I only goofed when I left the empty shells by the body.
'This was premeditated murder because I was planning to collect ransom. And if you want the story and no bull shit or no lies I will talk. But I want out of this cell. And if you are good enough to do that I will play ball. It is really a remarkable story and every detail fits to a
Although the various confessions differ in some respects, particularly with reference to what took place immediately prior to the shooting, any one of them was sufficient to justify the court in finding murder in the first degree. Furthermore, under NRS 200.030 murder which is committed in the perpetration of a robbery is deemed murder in the first degree. As in State v. Fouquette, 67 Nev. 505, 221 P.2d 404, the homicide in this case took place during the perpetration of a robbery and a kidnaping.
Appellant assigns the following errors in his brief on appeal.
1. Three photographic exhibits were received in evidence over objection which portrayed the portion of the ledge where the body was found. They were offered for the purpose of showing where the district attorney had found a used cartridge which later was identified as having been fired from appellant's automatic pistol. The main objection to this evidence was that the cartridge was not found until September 14th although death had occurred August 26th. This objection is without merit inasmuch as the cartridge itself was admitted into evidence without objection. The interval of time, in any event, would affect merely the weight and not the admissibility of the evidence.
2. Two of the confessions given by appellant were taken down in question and answer form and were introduced as one exhibit through the testimony of an official court reporter, Richard Tuttle. He testified that the transcribed notes correctly and accurately stated verbatim the conversations, one of which was with District Attorney Raggio and the other with Assistant District Attorney Gezelin. Appellant's objection to this...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Guyette v. State
...admissible. State v. Gambetta, 66 Nev. 317, 208 P.2d 1059 (1949); Morford v. State, 80 Nev. 438, 395 P.2d 861 (1964); Archibald v. State, 77 Nev. 301, 362 P.2d 721 (1961); State v. Holt, 47 Nev. 233, 219 P. 557 During rebuttal, the State introduced two letters written by Guyette to his wife......
-
Deutscher v. State, 10434
...Contracting Co., 149 Conn. 473, 181 A.2d 594, 596 (1962). Indeed, both of these statements were hearsay. See Archibald v. State, 77 Nev. 301, 307, 362 P.2d 721, 723-24 (1961); Cf. Alexander v. State, 84 Nev. 737, 449 P.2d 153 (1968) (defendant's testimony as to what a friend had said was he......
-
Rainsberger v. State
...P.2d 147; State v. Blackwell, 65 Nev. 405, 198 P.2d 280, 200 P.2d 698; Rainsberger v. State, 76 Nev. 158, 350 P.2d 995; Archibald v. State, 77 Nev. 301, 362 P.2d 721; Annot., 34 A.L.R.2d 919. The constitutional safeguards pointing to a fair trial are greatly diluted in significance, for a t......
-
Mills v. State
... ... Campbell v. State, 227 So.2d 873 (Fla.1969). Most certainly in this case, where Meli remained in continuous captivity from the commencement of the felony until his death, the nexus between ... the robbery and his death is clear. 6 Jefferson v. State, supra; Archibald v. State, 77 Nev. 301, 362 P.2d 721 (1961). See generally Annot., "What Constitutes Termination of Felony for Purposes of Felony-Murder Rule," 58 A.L.R.3d 851 (1974); R. Perkins, Criminal Law, Ch. 2, § 1 42-43 (2d ed. 1969) ... Similarly, the fact that Mills was not present when ... ...