Beasley v. State, 8 Div. 819
| Decision Date | 24 August 1976 |
| Docket Number | 8 Div. 819 |
| Citation | 337 So.2d 80 |
| Parties | Ricky BEASLEY v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
C. Collier Carlton, Montgomery, for appellant.
William J. Baxley, Atty. Gen., and Banzetta Penn Durant, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Appellant was convicted of robbery and the jury fixed his punishment at ten years imprisonment in the penitentiary. He was represented at arraignment and trial by retained counsel. He pleaded not guilty. After conviction he was found to be indigent and he was furnished a free transcript. Trial counsel was appointed to represent him on appeal. His counsel failed to file a brief and this Court appointed counsel to represent him on this appeal.
Appellant made application to be tried as a Youthful Offender and his application was referred to a probation officer for an investigation and report. Upon an examination and consideration of the probation officer's report, the Court denied appellant's application to be treated as a Youthful Offender.
In the light of appellant's motion to exclude the State's evidence we will summarize as much of the State's evidence as is necessary in treating the issues raised on this appeal.
On August 19, 1975, Charles E. Jackson, a graduate student of Alabama A & M University, and his roommate, Charles Woods, were watching television at their Ebony Heights house located at 215 Salem Drive in Huntsville, Madison County, Alabama. As Jackson rose to leave the room to go to the bathroom during a commercial, someone knocked on the door, which was not locked, and Jackson said, 'Come in' and continued walking toward the bathroom. Upon hearing someone call him Jackson turned and came face to face with appellant who was pointing a pistol at him.
Appellant grabbed Jackson by the arm and led him back to the living room where they found another tall and big black man holding a pistol on Charles Woods. The gunmen pushed and shoved Jackson and Woods from room to room still holding the pistols on them while they made a thorough search of the entire house. The bandits demanded money and jewelry. Appellant and his companion took from Jackson at gunpoint approximately $50.00 from his person and $600.00 that Jackson had in an envelope, half of which belonged to Woods. The gunmen also took from Jackson a watch and a ring and some items of clothing. They also took $73.00 from Woods and some clothing.
During the robbery appellant clutched Jackson's arm from time to time commanding him to move from place to place in the house. The robbers were in the house from 30 to 40 minutes and Jackson and Woods got a good look at them in close quarters in a well lighted house.
Both Jackson and Woods were physically abused and threatened and at one point appellant struck Woods on the back of the head with his pistol and he was carried to the hospital for x-rays. Before the robbers left they made Jackson and Woods stand against a wall and ordered them not to move. A few moments later one of the gunmen came back in the room just to be sure the robbery victims were still standing against the wall.
When the victims were certain the robbers had left, Jackson went next door and reported the robbery to the police department. The police officers arrived about 20 minutes later and got a description of the robbers. Jackson described appellant as having on some overalls, a light colored shirt, a straw hat and sunglasses. He described the other robber as wearing an Army fatigue jacket, a shirt with the sleeves cut out and jeans. He also gave the officers their approximate height and weight. One was over six feet tall and weighed about 180 to 190 pounds and appellant was much shorter.
Later at the police station Jackson and Woods were shown more than 20 photographs, separate and apart from each other, and both made independent identifications of appellant's photograph without suggestions from the officers. Over appellant's objection his picture was introduced into evidence. Both...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Presley v. State
...upon those discoverable with due diligence during voir dire. Robinson v. Monsanto Co., 758 F.2d 331 (8th Cir.1985); Beasley v. State, 337 So.2d 80 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Vaughn v. State, 173 Ga.App. 716, 327 S.E.2d 747 (1985); State v. Chattley, 390 A.2d 472 (Me.1978); Commonwealth v. Fudge, ......
-
Pardue v. State
...does not automatically disqualify the juror for cause, Carlton v. State, 415 So.2d 1241 (Ala.Cr.App.1982). See also Beasley v. State, 337 So.2d 80 (Ala.Cr.App.1976) (fact that juror was a professor at college attended by victim did not constitute ground of challenge for cause). "In a prosec......
-
General Motors Corp. v. Hopper
...waiver of grounds of challenge; a defendant cannot sit back and invite error based on a juror's disqualification. Beasley v. State, 337 So.2d 80 (Ala.Crim.App.1976). We have examined the record and have determined that the defendant failed to exercise due diligence in ascertaining the quali......
-
Nettles v. State
...receiving stolen meat which was the property of the school board and which was stolen from a county elementary school. Beasley v. State, 337 So.2d 80 (Ala.Cr.App.1976) (The fact that a prospective juror, in an armed robbery prosecution, was a professor at the college attended by the victim ......