McGee v. Norman
Decision Date | 24 December 2014 |
Docket Number | No. 4:11CV2212SNLJ (NCC),4:11CV2212SNLJ (NCC) |
Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri |
Parties | THOMAS C. MCGEE, Petitioner, v. JEFF NORMAN, Respondent |
This matter is before the court on Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Doc. 1). This matter has been referred to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). (Doc. 18). After reviewing the case, the court has determined that Petitioner is not entitled to relief. As a result, the court will recommend that the Petition be dismissed.
Petitioner was charged, by a nine-count information, for crimes against Marilyn Sharpe, J.B. Tidwell, and Alice Stith. In Count 1, Petitioner was charged with the class B felony of robbery in the second degree, in that, acting with another, he forcibly stole over $9,000 owned by Ms. Sharpe. In Count 2, Petitionerwas charged with the class B felony of kidnapping, in that, acting with another, Petitioner unlawfully held Ms. Sharpe without her consent, for the purpose of the felony robbing Ms. Sharpe of $14,500 cash or, in the alternative, for the purpose of terrorizing Ms. Sharpe. In Count 3, Petitioner was charged with the class A misdemeanor of false imprisonment, in that, acting with another, he falsely represented to Ms. Sharpe that he was a law enforcement officer, with the purpose of inducing Ms. Sharpe to submit to his pretended authority, and Petitioner commandeered Ms. Sharpe's vehicle and forced her to withdraw over $9,000, in that pretended capacity.
In Count 4, Petitioner was charged with the class C felony of attempted stealing over $25,000, in that, acting with another, Petitioner and his accomplice falsely represented themselves as police officers and appeared to obtain money from Mr. Tidwell, and such conduct was a substantial step toward the commission of the crime of stealing over $25,000 from Mr. Tidwell, and was done with the purpose of committing such stealing. In Count 5, Petitioner was charged with the class A misdemeanor of false impersonation, in that, acting with another, Petitioner falsely represented to Mr. Tidwell that he was a police detective, with the purpose of inducing Mr. Tidwell to rely upon his pretended official actions, and Mr. Tidwell went to the bank in accordance with Petitioner's instructions.
In Count 6, Petitioner was charged with the class B felony of stealing by deceit, in that, acting with another, Petitioner appropriated $6,193, owned by Ms. Stith, with the purpose of depriving her thereof by deceit, in that Petitioner represented to Ms. Stith that he and his accomplice were police officers investigating counterfeit United States currency, which representations were false and known by Petitioner to be false, and Ms. Stith relied on the representations and was thereby induced to part with such property. In Count 7, Petitioner was charged with the class A misdemeanor of false imprisonment, in that, acting with another, Petitioner falsely represented to Ms. Stith that he was a law enforcement officer, with the purpose of inducing Ms. Stith to submit to his pretended official authority, and Petitioner caused Ms. Stith to give him United States currency in reliance upon his pretended official authority.
In Count 8, Petitioner was charged with the class C felony of stealing by deceit, in that, acting with another, he appropriated $16,050, which was owned by Ms. Stith, and Petitioner appropriated such properly from Ms. Stith with the purpose of depriving her by deceit in that Petitioner represented to Ms. Stith that he and his accomplice were police officers investigating counterfeit United States currency, which representations were false and known by Petitioner to be false, and Ms. Stith relied on the representations and was thereby induced to part with such property.
In Count 9, Petitioner was charged with the class A misdemeanor of false imprisonment, in that, acting with another, Petitioner falsely represented to Ms. Stith that he was a law enforcement officer with the purpose to induce Ms. Stith to submit to his pretended official authority, and Petitioner caused Ms. Stith to give him United States currency in reliance upon his pretended official authority. Petitioner was charged as a persistent offender based on his previously being found guilty of two or more felonies. (Resp. Ex. A at 9-11).
All three victims were approximately eighty years old. The State charged Andrea Wilks as Petitioner's accomplice in committing the offenses against Ms. Sharpe and Mr. Tidwell. Missouri v. McGee, 284 S.W.3d 690, 695 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).1 Beginning on August 24, 2007, Petitioner and Mr. Wilks were tried together by jury. The evidence at Petitioner's trial was as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial