Hadley v. State

Decision Date29 June 1987
Docket NumberNo. 07-85-0263-CR,07-85-0263-CR
PartiesMark HADLEY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
CourtTexas Court of Appeals

Shelton & Jones, Travis D. Shelton and Dale Jones, Lubbock, Turner, Turner, Green & Braun, Ken Turner, Oklahoma City, Okl., for appellant.

Ruth Cantrell, Asst. Dist. Atty., Lubbock, for appellee.

Before REYNOLDS, C.J., and DODSON and COUNTISS, JJ.

REYNOLDS, Chief Justice.

Under a charge on the law of the parties, a jury convicted appellant Mark Hadley of murder, and assessed his punishment at confinement for sixty years in the Texas Department of Corrections. Appellant attacks the judgment with nine grounds of error. 1 The grounds are, in brief, contentions that the evidence is insufficient to support the conviction, that the trial court erred in admitting certain records and testimony, and that the court erred in its charge to the jury. 2 The grounds will be overruled, and the judgment will be affirmed.

The record compiled during the lengthy trial reveals a complex web of relationships and events that culminated in and followed the death of Monte Dean "Buddy" Reger on 28 March 1984. Because appellant's first seven grounds of error are directed to the admissibility and sufficiency of the evidence, a somewhat detailed summary of the facts is necessary.

Opal Reger owned a ranch near Woodward, Oklahoma, and controlled the finances. She and her deceased husband had three children--Virginia, Dixie, and the victim, Buddy Reger. Virginia married Tom Hadley and their son, Mark Hadley, is the appellant.

According to the testimony of Randall Loyd Thompson, the accomplice in the murder for which appellant was convicted, he met appellant and eventually became his friend. Thompson wanted to become a professional rodeo clown and believed that appellant could help him. In February of 1984, 3 Thompson moved into an apartment at the Reger ranch after appellant offered him a place to stay in exchange for his labor.

While living at the ranch, Thompson saw Buddy Reger, the deceased, several times, two of which were between the middle of February and March 19, when Reger visited the ranch. Appellant told Thompson that he, appellant, and Reger had disagreements over ranch matters and, on one occasion, Thompson observed a dispute between them over a colt. Reger, appellant said, was upset about appellant's keeping his rodeo stock on the ranch, and he had to move his stock to other pastures.

Appellant told Thompson, so Thompson testified, that Reger intended to cause trouble in order to put a strain on his grandmother. Reger would mess up the books that he and Opal Reger had in order, and the auditors would be coming. If Reger could prove that Opal Reger was incompetent, he, Reger, would gain control of the ranch. In that event, Reger would sell the ranch, appellant's mother and aunt would not recover anything, and Opal Reger would not have a place to live.

In the continuation of Thompson's testimony, appellant said during the first week of March that the family and the ranch would be better off if Buddy Reger was dead. Appellant expressed the same sentiment in different words a week later. Subsequently, appellant stated that time was running out and, about a week before March 19, said that something had to be done quickly.

Thompson agreed to murder Buddy Reger to save the family ranch, to prevent Opal Reger from being evicted, and to assure that appellant's mother and aunt would get their share of the ranch. Appellant promised Thompson a permanent home and increased involvement at the ranch.

Thompson was convinced by appellant that he would only spend a couple of years in the penitentiary if he was convicted, and that he could return to the ranch upon his release. Appellant promised to help Thompson with his legal fees if he was arrested.

He could not have murdered Buddy Reger alone, Thompson said, because he did not have adequate funds, but the expense money provided by appellant gave him the ability to commit the murder. Appellant gave Thompson $1,500 to $1,700 expense money before and after the murder. At appellant's suggestion, Thompson purchased a sawed-off shotgun with the intent to use it to murder Buddy Reger.

On March 19, Thompson drove his car to Elk City, Oklahoma, and purchased a bus ticket to Amarillo, Texas. Arriving by Greyhound bus in Amarillo, he took a taxi to the Amarillo airport, where he attempted to rent a car. Because he did not have a major credit card, the car rental company refused to lease a car to him.

Then, Thompson taxied back into Amarillo and rented a motel room. He telephoned appellant and told him about the requirements of the car rental company. Later, Thompson, confirming that Budget Rent-A-Car had contacted appellant, went there and rented a dark gray or charcoal colored Firebird.

Thompson drove the car to Clarendon and picked up his friend, Kevin Bryant. Arriving in Lubbock on March 20, Thompson obtained two addresses for people listed under the name of Reger in the telephone book. He showed Bryant a small photograph of Reger he was carrying, and they located the two addresses, one of which was Buddy Reger's address. Thompson and Bryant returned to Clarendon that night.

Thompson proceeded to Lubbock the next day and stayed with Max Payne, whom he had met through rodeo friends and with whom he had previously stayed. During the next five days, he located and went inside Reger's business, a battery shop, checked out various routes through Lubbock, and attended a rodeo.

On Friday, March 23, the shotgun was stolen from the Firebird. That night, about midnight, Thompson called appellant collect from a large motel located on the south side of Lubbock near the loop. He reported to appellant that the shotgun had been stolen and that there had been no opportunity to shoot Reger.

The next day, Saturday, March 24, Thompson followed Reger to the airport, and then went to Payne's house. He told Payne that his belongings had been stolen and enlisted his help in obtaining a pistol. They went to Fred's Gun Shop, where Payne purchased a .22 caliber pistol for Thompson. Later, in a conversation with Payne, Thompson learned that some type of shot could be fired from a .38 caliber pistol which was not traceable, similar to that fired from a shotgun. About midnight of that day, Thompson called appellant collect from Motel 6, telling appellant that he did not want to use the .22 pistol to commit the murder, but wanted to use untraceable shot from a .38 caliber pistol.

Thompson drove to the Reger ranch in the Firebird on Monday, March 26. Appellant, Thompson reported, gave him $200 cash and a $300 check, which was referenced for bull fighting. Thompson cashed the check at a bank in Woodward, and purchased a .38 caliber pistol at Gill's Gun and Pawn Shop. Then, Thompson traveled to Clarendon and spent the night with Bryant.

On Tuesday, March 27, Thompson drove to Amarillo and rerented the Firebird. Driving toward Lubbock, he digressed to Palo Duro Canyon to telephone appellant from a trading post.

Arriving in Lubbock at approximately 4 p.m., Thompson went to a gas station near Reger's battery shop and obtained gas. He parked the car near the gas station, went inside, and watched Reger's business. When Reger left, Thompson followed him to his home.

Next, Thompson went to a Motel 6 near Reger's business and checked in under the name of Ronnie Thomas. Afterwards, he went to a large store, telephoned appellant, who said that it had to be done the next day because Reger was planning to come to Woodward that weekend.

On Wednesday, March 28, Thompson first drove to Reger's home and deflated a tire on his son's vehicle. He next drove to the service station near Reger's business and parked behind it. He later drove to a nearby convenience store, where he placed mud on the license plates, and then drove to Reger's battery shop, parked the car and waited.

After Reger arrived, Thompson went into the shop. He shot Reger three times with the .38 caliber pistol and killed him.

As Thompson drove away in the Firebird, he saw a man, later identified to him by appellant as Reger's son-in-law, driving to the business. Thompson went to the Motel 6 and discarded the spent cartridges.

Afterwards, he drove to Amarillo, returned the Firebird to Budget Rent-A-Car, and went to the Greyhound bus station. From there, Thompson called appellant collect. Appellant informed Thompson that "they" were looking for a man matching his appearance and the car he had been driving. Appellant instructed Thompson to call him when he arrived in Elk City.

Thompson rode the bus to Elk City, from whence he drove his car to Hammon. He called appellant collect. Afterwards, he drove to a friend's house and stayed there.

The next day, Thursday, March 29, Thompson called appellant and they arranged to meet at the land appellant leased. At that meeting, Thompson gave appellant the .38 caliber pistol and the unused shells. Appellant told him that he had to stay away from the ranch because people would be coming and asking questions. Appellant also gave Thompson $200 in cash, suggested that he shave his mustache, and told him that he, appellant, would contact his friends Joe Chick and George Taylor to make arrangements for him to stay with them over the next several days.

Following appellant's instructions, Thompson drove to Chick's house and spent the night. On Saturday morning, March 31, he drove to Cleburne, where he met Taylor.

Still following appellant's instructions, Thompson told Taylor about the murder, albeit he did not really say anything about appellant's involvement. Taylor was shocked and upset at both Thompson and appellant. After a few days, Taylor gave Thompson $1,000 cash and told him that he had received it from appellant.

Thompson drove to Austin, attended a rodeo, and called appellant several times. Several days later, Thompson...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Callaway v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • June 26, 1991
    ...McCann v. State, 606 S.W.2d 897, 898 (Tex.Cr.App.1980). Consequently, the court did not err in receiving the testimony. Hadley v. State, 735 S.W.2d 522, 531 (Tex.App.--Amarillo 1987, pet'n refused). Points of error ten and eleven are With her twelfth point, appellant poses the question whet......
  • Weller v. State, 09-87-214-CR
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • January 11, 1989
    ...or statements of the co-conspirator were said or performed outside of the presence or hearing of the accused. Hadley v. State, 735 S.W.2d 522 (Tex.App.--Amarillo 1987, pet. ref'd); Ruiz v. State, 698 S.W.2d 405 (Tex.App.--Corpus Christi 1985, no pet.); Crisp v. State, 643 S.W.2d 487 (Tex.Ap......
  • Williams v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • June 6, 1990
    ...made during the course of the conspiracy and were admissible. Morgan v. State, Ct.Crim.Appls, 519 S.W.2d 449, 451; Hadley v. State, CA (Amarillo) 1987, 735 S.W.2d 522, 531. Point 1 is overruled. [sic Appellant urges a narrow construction of the requirement that the statement of a co-conspir......
  • Hollingsworth v. King
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • April 26, 1991
    ...the Hollingsworths' request. We therefore decline to take judicial notice of the municipal ordinances. See Hadley v. State, 735 S.W.2d 522, 530 (Tex.App.--Amarillo 1987, pet. ref'd); Myers v. Cliff Hyde Flying Service, Inc., 325 S.W.2d 841, 846 (Tex.Civ.App.--Houston 1959, no writ). Our det......
  • 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