State v. Aiken
| Decision Date | 26 October 1967 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 38592,38629,s. 38592 |
| Citation | 72 Wn.2d 306,434 P.2d 10 |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE of Washington, Respondent, v. Arthur Nathaniel AIKEN, Appellant. STATE of Washington, Respondent, v. Antonio Nathaniel WHEAT, Appellant. |
Robert S. Egger, Anthony Savage, Jr., Charles M. Stokes, Philip L. Burton, Seattle, for appellant.
Charles O. Carroll, Pros. Atty., Seattle, William L. Kinzel, Jack A. Richey, Deputy Attys. Gen., for respondent.
Douglas Shaw Palmer, Seattle, amicus curiae.
This is an appeal from the conviction of the defendants (appellants), Antonio N. Wheat and Arthur N. Aiken, on three counts of murder in the first degree, while the defendants were engaged in committing, attempting to commit, or withdrawing from the scene of a robbery. The death penalty was imposed by a special verdict of the jury.
Wheat and Aiken were airmen 3rd class in the United States Air Force, stationed at Paine Field near Everett, Washington, at the time of the commission of the homicides with which they were charged. Both are Negroes and were 20 and 19 years of age, respectively. Wheat is a high school graduate and had worked in Spiegel's Store in Chicago, Illinois, in a supervisory capacity; he had served 2 years in the Air Force, performing the duties of a cook, and had aspirations of becoming a school teacher. Aiken had been in the Air Force for 2 years and through its educational facilities had completed his high school education; in addition, he held one of the degrees of 'brown belt' in service judo competition.
The three homicides with which the defendants were charged were the killing of Owen Fair, service station attendant of a Time Oil Service Station in Seattle, on March 26, 1965; the killing of Daniel Wolf, service station attendant of an Enco Service Station in Seattle, on April 12, 1965; and the killing of James Harp, service station attendant of a Douglas Service Station north of Seattle in King County, on April 24, 1965.
Evidence leading to the apprehension of defendant Wheat came from the identification of Wheat's car which had been seen at the Douglas Service Station April 24th at about 4 o'clock in the morning, approximately 15 minutes before the estimated time of Harp's death. Later that day a car matching the description of the vehicle, observed at the Douglas station, was discovered by police officers in a parking About 4 o'clock that afternoon Wheat was taken into custody at Paine Field; advised that his automobile had been observed at the scene of a homicide and that he matched the description of a person seen there. He consented to a lineup, where he was identified by witnesses as having been at the Douglas Station shortly prior to the homicide. Later that evening Wheat was taken from Paine Field to the King County jail.
lot opposite the main gate of Paine Field. A check with the Snohomish County sheriff's office disclosed it to be Wheat's car.
Statements taken from Wheat at Paine Field implicated the defendant Aiken, whereupon an all points bulletin was issued over the police radio, and resulted in Aiken's apprehension on the evening of April 25, 1965, at Blaine, Washington. He was taken into custody by the Border Patrol and transported by the Blaine police to the Whatcom County jail at Bellingham. Later the same evening he was met by officers of the Seattle Police Department and the King County sheriff's office and taken to the King County jail.
To more completely understand the contentions raised on this appeal, as well as the extent of the asserted participation and complicity of the defendants in the alleged homicides, the defendants' respective versions of the robberies and homicides, as appear in their written statements, introduced in evidence, are set forth in substantial detail. Clerical corrections, as they appear, are also inserted as initialed by each defendant.
In Wheat's statement (state's exhibit 4) taken at 11:08 p.m., on April 25, 1965, with regard to the Time Oil Station robbery and homicide of Owen Fair at about 10:30 p.m. on March 26, 1965, Wheat states:
I have been advised by Detectives E. T. Mullen, and O. C. Church, of the Seattle Police Department, that I do not have to say anything. That I have a right to see an attorney before saying anything, and that anything I do say, could be used against me in a court of law.
* * * I saw Aiken had the man backed into a small storage area. Aiken was pointing his silver colored, .22 caliber automatic at the man. The man was just standing there, with his hands probably held about half way up. Aikens reached over, and pulled a key off the mans belt, that was attached to a string of some sort. Aiken handed me the key, and told me to go check the cash box. I took it, and went into the office. I opened the cash box, on the counter against the wall, with the key. The box was empty, so I returned to lube room, and told Aiken. At that time, Aikens asked the man, where the money was. The man said he had just come back from taking the money somewhere. At that time, Aikens hit the man in the face, with his left hand. The man said, 'please, I have heart trouble,' and put his hands over his face. When he said this, Aikens kind of clubed the man behind his head, with his left hand, and the man fell on the floor. As the man was laying on the floor, Aikens [434 P.2d 16] went through his pockets. He took the mans wallet from his back pocket, and some money from the mans shirt pocket. Aikens then asked the man if he had any more. The man didn't say anything, just laid on the floor. At this time, I went out to the car, to start it, because I had been having trouble getting it started. I was trying to start the car, when I heard about four or five gunshots, from the station. I looked back toward the station, and saw Aikens walk out of the lube, into the office. He stood there for a few seconds, looking around, then he walked on outside, and got into my car. I managed to start the car, and I drove away, * * *. On the way from the station, to Macs Show Place, Aiken divided the money we had got. My share was about thirty eight dollars. * * *
This is a true and voluntary statement, given freely by me, to Detectives E. T. Mullen, and O. C. Church of the Seattle Police Dept., without threats, promises, or under conditions of duress.
Aiken's version of the same robbery and homicide in his statement (state's exhibit 7) taken at 3:30 a.m., April 26, 1965, is as follows:
I have been advised by Detective E. T. Mullen of the Seattle Police Dept, that I do not have to say anything, that I have a right to see an attorney before saying anything, and that anything I do say, could be used against me in a court of law.
* * * There was a middle aged, fat white man in the station office. Wheat and I walked into the office, * * * Wheat and I remained in the office, until the man came back into there from the lube room. As the man started back into the office, I pulled out my silver colored, .22 caliber automatic, and pointed it at the man. I was carrying the gun in my inside jacket pocket. I think I held the gun in my left hand. I told the man to get back in there, and the three of us went back into a side room off the lube room. I told the man to give me the money, and he didn't say anything, just started to reach into his right front trousers pocket. As the man did this, Antonio grabbed the mans wrist, and reached into the mans pocket himself. Wheat pulled some money paper currency, out of the mans pocket. Wheat then reached into the mans front shirt pocket, and took out some more paper currency. I told the man to turn around, as he was facing me. The man turned around, and I put my gun in Wheats hand, as he reached for it. At the same time, Wheat handed me a small, white colored can of ether. I had got this can of ether, from the base dispensery, about two or three days before, and had given it to Wheat, and he had placed it in his car.
After Wheat had given me the can of ether, I poured a large amount into a rag I had picked up. I reached around the man, and quickly placed the rag over his mouth and nose. He struggled for a few moments, but I held on to him. The man went limp in my arms, and I laid him on the floor. Wheat handed my gun back to me, and he then grabbed a key, on a white string, that was tied to the mans belt loop. I stood, and covered the man with my gun, as Wheat went into the station office to check the cash drawer. Wheat came back and said there wasn't anything in there. I suggested we leave. The man was still laying on the floor, and he was mumbling. Wheat said we couldn't leave yet. I asked him what in hell he was talking about. Wheat replied that we had to shoot him, referring to the man on the floor. I told Wheat I wasn't going to shoot him, so Wheat told me to give him the gun. I then handed the gun to Wheat, and stepped back by the doorway. Wheat then leaned over the man on the floor, and fired at least four shots into the mans head. I believe another shot hit the man in the chest. The man was laying flat on his back when he was shot, and I estimate that Wheat held the gun about one foot away from the man, when he shot him. After the
shooting, I turned, and walked out of the station, going back to the car. A few moments later, Wheat came out, and walked back to the car. Wheat got in and we drove off. * * * Wheat counted the currency we had got from the Time Station man, and it totaled about seventy dollars. Wheat divided it, and gave me my half (initials inserted: A.N.A.), which was a little over thirty dollars. * * * Wheat had also taken a new battery from the station, and placed it on the rear floorboards of his car. * * * This is a true and voluntary statement, given freely by me, to Detective E. T. Mullen of the Seattle Police Dept, without threats, promises, or under conditions of duress....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Todd
... ... Each appellant denied his guilt to investigating officers and to the court, both before and during the trial. Statements made by each to the police may have implicated the others in his alibi, but not in the crime ... In State v. Aiken, 75 Wash.2d 421, 452 P.2d 232 (1969), we held that the case of Bruton v. United States, Supra, did not stand for the proposition that, where both defendants have confessed and each confession has implicated the other, and where there is other circumstantial evidence tending to prove the guilt of ... ...
-
Martini ex rel. Dussault v. State
... ... 47 AM. JUR. 2D Jury § 233 (1995). The analysis and result of State v. Aiken, 72 Wash.2d 306, 434 P.2d 10 (1967), vacated on other grounds by Wheat v. Washington, 392 U.S. 652, 88 S.Ct. 2302, 20 L.Ed.2d 1387 (1968), is in accord with this general rule. Aiken's co-defendant, Wheat, unsuccessfully challenged a juror and then apparently excused the juror with a ... ...
-
State v. McKnight
... ... Surely Miranda does not say that a man's deed or word may not be used against him merely because he was unaware of its incriminating thrust, State v. Aiken, Wash., 434 P.2d 10, 26 (Sup.Ct.1967), or unless he first rejected an opportunity for advice by counsel. Cf. Ballay v. People, Colo., 419 P.2d 446 (Sup.Ct.1966). A man could not escape his confession to a friend or relative because he thought that what he said did not constitute proof of a crime ... ...
-
State v. Lee, 40548-2-II
... ... Physical presence at the scene and knowledge of the crime are not enough. Wilson, 91 Wn.2d at 491. The State must prove the defendant was "'ready to assist.'" Wilson, 91 Wn.2d at 491 (quoting State v. Aiken, 72 Wn.2d 306, 349, 434 P.2d 10 (1967), vacated on other grounds by Wheat v. Washington, 392 U.S. 652, 88 S. Ct. 2302, 20 L. Ed. 2d 1357 (1968)). An accomplice need not have specific knowledge of every element of the crime committed by the principal, provided he or she has general knowledge of ... ...