Bond v. State

Decision Date02 September 1932
Docket NumberA-8357.
PartiesBOND v. STATE.
CourtUnited States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Rehearing Denied Sept. 30, 1932.

Syllabus by the Court.

1. Where the sufficiency of the evidence to corroborate an accomplice is challenged, this court will take the strongest view of the corroborating testimony that such testimony will warrant, and, if it can say that there is corroborating evidence tending to connect defendant with the commission of the offense, it will uphold the verdict.

2. When the instructions of the court fairly and impartially cover all the issues in the case, it is not error to refuse additional requested instructions which tend to emphasize any particular phase of the case.

3. A judgment of conviction will not be reversed because of the remarks of the trial judge, where such remarks were invited or encouraged by the conduct of defendant's counsel unless it is clear that the impropriety complained of amounted to a deprivation of some constitutional or statutory right guaranteed to defendant.

4. Where a witness for the defendant is arrested by the state on the order of the county attorney immediately after he has testified, but out of the hearing and presence of the jury and without their having any information thereof, and where defendant's counsel in open court and in the presence of the jury advises the court of the arrest of such witness defendant will not be heard to complain that the jury learned of the arrest.

Appeal from District Court, Muskogee County; W. J. Crump, Judge.

J. R Bond was convicted of arson in the second degree, and he appeals.

Judgment modified and, as modified, affirmed.

C. A. Armbrister and Harry G. Davis, both of Muskogee, and Ledbetter, Stuart, Bell & Ledbetter, of Oklahoma City, for plaintiff in error.

J. Berry King, Atty. Gen., Smith C. Matson, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Phil. Oldham, of Muskogee, for the State.

CHAPPELL J.

Plaintiff in error, hereinafter called defendant, was convicted in the district court of Muskogee county of the crime of arson in the second degree, and his punishment fixed by the court at imprisonment in the state penitentiary for a period of four years.

Defendant contends first that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the verdict, because the evidence of Harry Castator, an accomplice, was not sufficiently corroborated to connect defendant with the offense.

The evidence of the state was that on July 1, 1931, defendant obtained title to a large home in the city of Muskogee; that he was a resident of Oklahoma City and maintained a home there and had no use for this Muskogee property as a residence for his family; that between April 15th and July 8th, the property had been extensively advertised for sale, but no offer worth considering had been received; that the property was mortgaged for $9,000, with a $9,000 insurance policy payable to the holder of the mortgage and $15,000 additional insurance payable to defendant; that these premises had been built by O. T. Graham and were occupied by him at the time the property was disposed of to defendant, and that Graham remained in possession of the property at a rental of $150 for a month and a half and $50 per month thereafter, and which possession was to continue until August 1st; that defendant for a number of years had been acquainted with and friendly to Harry Castator, who resided at Bristow, Okl., and was employed by the Ford Hardware as a salesman; that on the 8th day of July, defendant came to Bristow and got Castator in his car, took him out on the road, and told him that he wanted a house in Muskogee burned, and promised Castator $1,000 if he would set fire to it; that they went back to the hardware store and Castator told Ford that he wanted a leave of absence to go to Tulsa; that thereupon defendant and Castator got in defendant's car and drove to Muskogee for the purpose of looking the house over and making arrangements to burn it; that when they reached Muskogee, defendant introduced Castator to the Grahams, not by name but merely as a painter, and explained that having disposed of the property he would have to have some painting done and wanted Castator to look it over; that on the 18th day of July, defendant wrote to Mrs. Graham, who was at that time in Oklahoma City, telling her that he would want possession of the place on the 20th of July; that on the 25th day of July, and while the Grahams were vacating the premises, defendant came and told Graham he had sold the place; that Graham gave defendant the key for the Yale lock to the front door and a key to the side door, which defendant took away with him; that the keys for the other doors were gathered up and placed by defendant in a drawer in a cabinet in the house; that on the morning of July 31st, this residence was badly damaged by fire, the remains of which showed it to be of incendiary origin.

Castator testified that on the 25th of July, defendant took him to Muskogee to look the house over and plan the fire; that he told defendant it was too big a job for one man and that, with defendant's consent, he arranged for Frank Schribner to help him; that defendant left him at Bristow and told him to get Schribner and be in Muskogee on Sunday morning and meet him at the Graham home, at 9 o'clock; that they met defendant there and went over the house together and figured out the best plan to burn the house; that defendant suggested they should use not less than thirty gallons of gasoline; that it was there agreed that the witness, Schribner, and defendant would meet at the house on the next Wednesday, with the gasoline; that defendant said he had two keys given him by Graham, and gave him one of them, and he used that to get into the house through the side door; that the key exhibited to him by the county attorney was the one received from Bond and used to get into the house; that defendant gave him the key and $25 expense money before they left the house; that on the 28th day of July he bought six cans of gasoline and a bucket with the money given him by defendant; that he and Schribner left Bristow on Wednesday and got to Muskogee about 5 o'clock; that they drove into the alley back of the Graham house and carried the gasoline into the house; that they got into the house with the key given to him by defendant; that they then left Muskogee and drove to Okmulgee and came back to Muskogee about 1 o'clock in the morning; that they found a car in the garage and, being afraid to burn the house, they went back to Bristow; that the next day they went to Oklahoma City and went to defendant's residence; that at that time they told defendant what they had done; that defendant gave the witness a check for $10 as additional expense money; that this check was in witness' possession when he was arrested; that they went to Muskogee, entered the Graham home, opening the side door with the key defendant had given witness, and carried five gallons of gasoline upstairs in the attic and poured it in some boxes and on the floor and down the stairway to the second floor, and poured two five-gallon cans on the second floor, and left a small bucket full of gasoline setting on the second floor; on the first floor and the stairway they scattered three five-gallon cans and left a water bucket full of gasoline at the stairway; that they soaked some rags in gasoline and tied them together to lead from the bucket of gasoline to the door on the west side of the house and to the back; that Schribner touched a match to this gasoline soaked rag and they hurriedly left town, and came back some hours later; that on Sunday morning following the fire, defendant came to his residence and told him the county attorney had called him to Muskogee to talk about the fire; that defendant made an appointment to meet the county attorney in Muskogee, Monday; that Castator put the key to the Graham house, given him by defendant and used to open the house at the time it was burned on a rock under the corner of the house where he lived; and that this key was later found by the fire marshal.

Defendant admitted in his testimony that he met Castator at the times and places testified to, and that he gave him the money and the check, but explained it by saying that Castator was an important witness in a case pending in court, and that the trips were over that case and the money given for Castator's expenses in that case.

Counsel for defendant contend that the record fails to show sufficient corroboration by evidence other than that of the accomplice to connect Bond with the crime.

The state admits...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Rice v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • April 9, 1937
    ... ... punishment assessed in this case to four years in the ... penitentiary. The defendant, as shown in the record, has ... served two hundred and seventy days in jail before his ... conviction. He has been in the penitentiary for eighteen ... months, being unable to make bond, and we think that when he ... serves sufficient time to satisfy four-year sentence that ... justice will have been done in this case for any error that ... might have been committed. The defendant, by his attorney, at ... the beginning of the trial admitted he was guilty as a second ... ...
  • Howerton v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • March 24, 1939
    ... ... 281, 135 P. 1156 ...          In the ... following cases the evidence was held sufficient: Rice v ... State, 60 Okl.Cr. 398, 64 P.2d 1240; McLaughlin v ... State, 18 Okl.Cr. 627, 197 P. 717; Hendrix v. State, ... 8 Okl.Cr. 530, 129 P. 78, 43 L.R.A.,N.S., 546; Bond ... v. State, 54 Okl.Cr. 39, 14 P.2d 425; Varner v ... State, 42 Okl.Cr. 42, 274 P. 43; Moody v ... State, 13 Okl.Cr. 327, 164 P. 676; Underwood v ... State, 36 Okl.Cr. 21, 251 P. 507; Hendrix v ... State, 22 Okl.Cr. 230, 210 P. 734 ...          In the ... case of Rogers v ... ...
  • Hufford v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • March 26, 1937
    ...evidence, however, must show more than the mere commission of the offense or the circumstances thereof." See, also, Bond v. State, 54 Okl.Cr. 39, 14 P.2d 425; Underwood v. State, 36 Okl.Cr. 21, 251 P. McCurdy v. State, 39 Okl.Cr. 310, 264 P. 925; Patterson v. State, 42 Okl.Cr. 255, 275 P. 3......
  • Belt v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • March 27, 1936
    ...is corroborated in some material point which shows the connection of the defendant with the commission of the offense." In Bond v. State, 54 Okl.Cr. 39, 14 P.2d 425, this said: "Where the sufficiency of the evidence to corroborate an accomplice is challenged, this court will take the strong......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT