State v. Bacon, KCD
| Decision Date | 05 November 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. KCD,KCD |
| Citation | 501 S.W.2d 499 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. William Joseph BACON, Appellant. 26361. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
James L. McMullin, Hill & McMullin, Kansas City, for appellant; John J. Cosgrove, Kansas City, of counsel.
John C. Danforth, Atty. Gen., Vincent F. Igoe, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before DIXON, C.J., PRITCHARD, J., and FRANK CONLEY, Special Judge.
The appeal in this matter was originally filed in the Supreme Court. The cause was ordered transferred to this Court, in which jurisdiction is vested, Article V, Section 3, V.A.M.S., Constitution of Missouri, as amended; Garrett v. State, 481 S.W.2d 225 (Mo. banc 1972).
The defendant was charged with first degree robbery by means of a dangerous and deadly weapon. The death penalty was waived. He was found guilty of the offense and the jury being unable to agree upon punishment, same was fixed by the court at imprisonment for a term of thirty-five years. Defendant has appealed.
The defendant assigns as the only error on this appeal, that the trial court erred in finding that at the time of the alleged offense the defendant was not suffering from any mental defect or disease excluding responsibility, alleging that there was no evidence to support this finding, and that the defendant was denied due process of law.
Those facts which are relevant to this contention are that on August 9, 1971, prior to the trial of this matter, a motion to rely on the defense of mental disease or defect pursuant to the provisions of Section 552.030, RSMo 1969, V.A.M.S. was filed by the attorney for the defendant and an examination was ordered and conducted at the Western Missouri Mental Health Center, Kansas City, Missouri. Dr. Bruno H. Zwerenz, M.D., filed with the court a four page written report under date of November 9, 1971, together with a follow-up letter dated December 29, 1971. This cause was set for trial on February 7, 1972, and on February 3, 1972, the Prosecuting Attorney requested a continuance of the matter until February 20, 1972 alleging as a basis for the continuance that the complaining witness was ill and unavailable for trial. The cause was continued and reset for trial on March 13, 1972. On March 2, 1972, the defendant filed a second motion for mental examination under the provisions of Sections 552.020 and 552.030, RSMo 1969, V.A.M.S. alleging that the defendant at the time of the occurrence in question suffered from a mental disease or defect to the extent that he did not know or appreciate the nature, character, or wrongfulness of his conduct and was incapable of conforming his conduct to the requirements of the law and that for the further reason that the defendant lacks capacity to understand proceedings against him or to assist in his own defense. This motion was denied on March 2, 1972, on the basis that it was filed out of time and because the defendant had already had one examination. On the morning of trial, March 12, 1972, the court took up the question of determination called for by Chapter 552, and after making reference to the reports of Dr. Zwerenz the court found that the defendant does have the mental capacity to cooperate with counsel and to assist in his own defense and that at the time of the alleged offense the defendant was not suffering from any mental defect or disease excluding...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Vansandts, 37115
...of lack of responsibility or a mental disease or defect excluding responsibility within the meaning of Chapter 552. State v. Bacon, 501 S.W.2d 499, 501 (Mo.App.1973); cf. State v. Olinger, 396 S.W.2d 617, 620 The trial court did not err in this regard. VI Lastly, appellant contends that the......
-
Engle v. State
...cited by the State, Ball v. State, 278 Ark. 423, 646 S.W.2d 693 (1983); Mikel v. State, 550 S.W.2d 863 (Mo.App.1977); and State v. Bacon, 501 S.W.2d 499 (Mo.App.1973), can easily be distinguished by differences in facts and controlling state statutes. We find the case of Miller v. State, 49......
-
State v. Shipman
...there was no proof of the purported defense and, hence, no requirement that instructions be submitted on the subject. State v. Bacon, 501 S.W.2d 499, 501(2) (Mo.App.1973). A third point relied on concerns the amended information. As initially filed, the pleading commenced with an averment o......
-
State v. Johnson
...introduces substantial evidence of lack of responsibility, whereupon the matter becomes one for the trier of facts. State v. Bacon, 501 S.W.2d 499 (Mo.App.1973). The question of defendant's lack of responsibility was for the jury. Point six is ruled against Defendant's seventh point is that......