Eckert v. State
| Decision Date | 27 March 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 7606,7606 |
| Citation | 91 Nev. 183,533 P.2d 468 |
| Parties | Edward D. ECKERT, Appellant, v. STATE of Nevada, Respondent. |
| Court | Nevada Supreme Court |
Rogers, Monsey, Lea, Woodbury & Sheehan, Las Vegas, for appellant.
Robert List, Atty. Gen., Carson City, George E. Holt, Dist. Atty., and Dan M. Seaton, Chief Deputy, Dist. Atty., Las Vegas, for respondent.
The body of Lee Page Merkle was found on the outer perimeters of the parking lot at Clark County's outdoor sports stadium in the vicinity of Henderson, Nevada, and the metropolitan area of Las Vegas. The body was found in the early morning hours of December 26, 1971, with nine bullet holes made from three different ewapons: a 9 millimeter, a .380 caliber and a .22 caliber.
Late in 1972, Gordon Overton, James Hilt and the appellant, Edward D. Eckert, were separately arrested and charged with the commission of the murder of Merkle.
Events leading to their arrest commenced in the small community of Shawnee Mission just outside of Kansas City, Kansas, where Eckert and Overton, both then 17 years of age, had been causal acquaintances. Hilt, a late comer on the scene, was older than the other two and apparently of some affluence because money seemed to be readily available to him. In a series of events leading up to the crime, they had practiced firing at a shooting range in the small community, where Hilt at that time provided the money for the purchase of a 9 millimeter automatic Smith and Wesson for himself and a Browning .380 for Eckert. Eckert signed the Federal Arms Regulation forms because he was the only one of the three with a Kansas driver's license which was a prerequisite to the buying of the guns.
Later that day, they decided to go to Las Vegas, Nevada, Overton testifying that their purpose was to just have a good time, but Eckert testified he went along because Hilt hired him to drive a truck back from Las Vegas for the sum of $600.00. While driving in Hilt's car on the way to Las Vegas, the automobile broke down near Thoreau, New Mexico, for the rest of the trip.
From there the story differs. Overton testifying against Eckert on behalf of the State said that all three went on to Las Vegas together. Eckert said that he was left behind to watch over Hilt's broken automobile. Later, he said, Hilt returned from Las Vegas in the evening hours of December 26, picked him up and together they returned to the Kansas City area. Overton testified, on the other hand, that while the three were in Las Vegas and roaming around that area they picked up Merkle who had just left a bar near the Boulder highway. Again according to Overton, after Merkle entered the car Eckert threatened to shoot Merkle for no apparent reason, ordered Hilt to stop the car, Merkle to lie on the ground and that Eckert then fired three shots into the prone body of Merkle. Eckert turned his weapon to Hilt and Overton compelling those two to fire shots into Merkle so that all three were in the caper together. They later dispersed, Overton to return home on the telephonic orders of his father whom he called from Las Vegas. He claimed that he didn't know what ever happened to Hilt and Eckert thereafter except that Eckert by telephone from time to time threatened to kill him if he 'talked.'
Eckert's version sharply differs. His testimony was that when Hilt picked him up in Gallup on December 26 he knew nothing of any murder or any other unusual experience of the other two, that a plausible explanation was given him by Hilt for Overton's return directly to Kansas City. Later, apparently the weapons were disposed of by Hilt to different persons.
Hilt refused to testify for either party claiming 5th Amendment privileges against self-incrimination. Overton pleaded guilty to involuntary manslaughter. His time in the county jail after arrest was commuted to time served. The jury found Eckert guilty of murder, sentenced him to life imprisonment with possibility of parole. He appeals claiming that there was no evidence to corroborate Overton's testimony connecting Eckert with the murder which, of course, is essential in the case where a defendant is on trial and the evidence or testimony of an accomplice is being used against him. Also, Overton on cross-examination spontaneously stated that he had passed a polygraph test and this, too, was claimed as prejudicial error.
1. N.R.S. 175.291 1 requires that corroborative evidence must, without the aid of the accomplice, tend to connect the defendant with the commission...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Smith
...170). Even where the results are revealed, no reversal will be ordered if appropriate curative instructions are given (Eckert v. Nevada, 91 Nev. 183, 533 P.2d 468). However, where the results of the witness' polygraphic examination are revealed over the objection of defense counsel, and no ......
-
Hilt v. State
...merit. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. GUNDERSON, C.J., and ZENOFF, MOWBRAY and THOMPSON, JJ., concur. 1 Eckert v. State, 91 Nev. 183, 533 P.2d 468 (1975).2 See also State v. Jordan, 105 Ariz. 250, 462 P.2d 799 (1969); People v. Clark, 251 Cal.App.2d 868, 60 Cal.Rptr. 58 (1967)......
-
Eckert v. State
...in force, appellant apparently unsuccessfully made a similar and belated offer of proof as to an alibi witness. See Eckert v. State, 91 Nev. 183, 533 P.2d 468 (1975) (reversed on other grounds with alibi error not raised on appeal). The record shows that the prosecutor, during the offer of ......
-
Wynn Las Vegas, LLC v. O'Connell
... WYNN LAS VEGAS, LLC, D/B/A WYNN LAS VEGAS, Appellant, v. YVONNE O'CONNELL, AN INDIVIDUAL, Respondent. No. 70583 COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA August 30, 2018 ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE Wynn Las Vegas, LLC, appeals from a final judgment in a tort action. 1 Eighth Judicial District ... ...