State v. Allen
| Decision Date | 19 November 1921 |
| Docket Number | No. 22677.,22677. |
| Citation | 234 S.W. 837,290 Mo. 258 |
| Parties | STATE v. ALLEN. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Grundy County; L. B. Woods, Judge.
Charles Franklin Allen was convicted of murder in the second degree, and appeals. Affirmed.
On November 6, 1919, the prosecuting attorney of Grundy county, Mo., filed in the circuit court of said county his verified information charging defendant with murder in the first degree. It is alleged therein that defendant feloniously, etc., shot and killed Leota Marrs in said county on October 13, 1919.
On February 5, 1920, defendant waived a formal arraignment and entered a plea of not guilty.
On February 7, 1920, after a trial before a jury, the latter returned into court the following verdict:
Defendant, in due time, filed motions for a new trial and in arrest of judgment. Both motions were overruled, he was duly sentenced, and an appeal was granted him to this court.
As a matter of convenience, the defendant's wife will be designated in this statement us "Lea."
State's Evidence
The testimony on behalf of respondent tends to show substantially the following facts: That defendant, with the consent of deceased, married the latter's minor foster daughter, called Lea Marrs, who was then about 15 years of age; that, after remaining at the home of deceased a day or two subsequently to said marriage, defendant and wife went to live upon a farm in that neighborhood ; that they moved several times, and finally' located on the Tucker-Waldon farm, near the town of Brimson, in said county; that on October 13, 1919, the day of the killing, deceased lived a short distance from the Waldon farm, and within the limits of Brimson; that some animosity existed between defendant and deceased on account of the alleged interference of the latter in defendant's family affairs; that about midnight of October 12, 1919, appellant wrote and addressed a letter to deceased. The envelope on the outside, contained the following: "Mrs. Oddie Myres, Brimsou, Missouri." Said envelope contained a letter which reads as follows:
It appears that this letter was received by deceased on October 13, 1919; that about two days before the killing Lea and her baby were at the home of deceased, where Lea was doing some sewing, on the foster mother's machine, and that afternoon, as Lea went home, the deceased went with her and carried the baby; that Lea also borrowed on this occasion a dress from deceased, which is referred to hereafter in the testimony; that on receipt of above letter the deceased called upon her neighbor, Mrs. James Bennett, and told her about the receipt of the letter; that she was advised by Mrs. Bennett not to go to defendant's house.
The evidence tends to show that about dusk on the evening of October 13, 1919, the deceased, who had been walking with a cane, on account of a wounded knee, started toward the defendant's house; that she was seen near the gate opening from defendant's premises onto the public highway; that shortly after she reached this position two shots were fired, and shortly thereafter the deceased was found killed about 25 or 30 feet from defendant's house, and near the abovementioned gate.
Counsel for defendant at the commencement of the trial admitted in open court that defendant had shot and killed deceased.
After the shooting defendant remained at his home, made no effort to escape, and was taken into custody by the officer.
The foregoing took place in Grundy county, Mo.
Defendant's Evidence
The evidence in behalf of appellant took a fide range at the trial, and it it too voluminous to set out in detail here. It tends to show, in substance, that he was a hard-working, industrious man, and had a good reputation for peace and quietude; that he and Lea Marrs, the foster child of deceased and her husband, were married May 26, 1918; that deceased attended the wedding and gave her consent to the marriage; that Lea's mother was dead, and she was not related to deceased; that defendant and his wife moved to the Tucker-Waldon farm in May, 1919; that Melvin Richard Allen, minor child of defendant and Lea, was born March 26, 1919; that Lea became in a family way about one month after her marriage.
The testimony of Lea tends to show, in substance, that deceased, who was shown to be a turbulent and quarrelsome woman, became angry at defendant and his wife when she found the latter was pregnant; that she insisted upon Lea producing an abortion, to get rid of said child; that she offered part of a parasol to Lea to accomplish this purpose, and told her how to use it; that she furnished Lea some medicine to use for this purpose; that she urged Lea to jump off of a chair, or to accomplish the purpose in some other way, to get rid of the child; that Lea communicated the above facts to her husband; that deceased was opposed to Lea having children, and repeatedly said she would get rid of the above child; that deceased on various occasions said she would kill the child, as well as defendant and his wife; that these threats were likewise communicated to defendant by his wife. Lea further testified that she was afraid of deceased, and visited her, as shown by the evidence, because she was afraid not to do so; that she was afraid deceased would kill the child or herself and husband; that these matters were likewise communicated to the defendant; that, after learning of these things, defendant was greatly distressed in mind and brooded over them; that he was constantly in a deep study, was absent-minded, and was not like he had been formerly; that on October 12, 1919, when he wrote the note heretofore mentioned, he had been awake most of the night, was restless, and could not sleep; that this continued until about 2 o'clock a. m. on the morning of October 13, 1919, when he wrote deceased the foregoing note. Lea further testified that, when deceased came to their house about dusk on the evening of October 13, 1919, she told Lea to bring the baby out where she was, near the gate; that deceased asked her where she had been, and, on being told that she had been to one of the Aliens, the deceased then said, "Yes; you been to those d____n Aliens again, have you; I thought I told you not to go about them;" that deceased then asked for her dress, and Lea went after it; that she returned with the dress and gave it to deceased; that the latter then started to take the letter above mentioned out of her pocket, and Lea told her she need not do that, as she had already seen it; that deceased then commenced cursing defendant, called him a s____ of a b____, and asked Lea what she let him write that letter for; that deceased then said she came up to separate defendant and his wife; that, if she could not do it one way, she could the other. Lea further testified that deceased then cursed defendant, and, after being requested to leave by her, said he, Lea, and the baby could not stay together another night; that deceased started to take hold of the child, but she (Lea) moved away, and deceased then called him a d____n little b____; that deceased stood there talking in this way about 15 or 20 minutes, and defendant came around the east corner of the house; that deceased then asked him why he wrote that letter, and called him a s____ of a b____; that he told her to go away; that she swore again, and said she did not have to; that defendant then asked his wife to go into the house, and she did so; that she (Lea) then told defe:adant that deceased had said she was going to kill him and the baby, and said that she meant it; that defendant then took the shotgun, stepped outdoors, and told deceased to go away while she was halloaing and cursing him; that she heard defendant shoot, and deceased kept on cursing and halloaing; that she (Lea) stepped to the door, saw deceased standing about the middle of the road, quite a way from the gate, and deceased made a dash for the gate; that she (Lea) stepped right back and heard defendant shoot again.
The appellant testified in substance to practically the same facts as did his wife in regard to what occurred before he went into the house and got his shotgun. He also testified that, while he and his wife were at the gate with the deceased, the latter struck at him with the cane, and threatened to knock his brains out, as he went to the house with his wife; that deceased also said at that time that she was going to kill them, and that was what she came for. The defendant testified as follows:
He testified that he fired two shots close together without moving the gun; that he told her to go away; that she swore and said, "I am going to get you; that is what I come here for."
The defendant was not cross-examined.
The defendant and his wife were the only parties present at the time of the shooting except the deceased. Other persons appeared en the scene shortly after the shooting; and found the deceased dead, lying near the gate about 25 or 30 feet from defendant's house. The dress above mentioned was lying near her, and the cane and her bonnet were close by. She was lying on her face, with part of her chin shot off, and had apparently fallen without any struggle.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial