State v. Brown, WD
| Decision Date | 29 January 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. WD,WD |
| Citation | 804 S.W.2d 396 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. James Lee BROWN, Appellant. 43211. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Fred Duchardt, Public Defender, Liberty, for appellant.
David A. Baird, Nodaway County Pros. Atty., Maryville, for respondent.
Before LOWENSTEIN, P.J., and BERREY and GAITAN, JJ.
Appellant was convicted by a jury for driving while intoxicated and the trial judge sentenced him to one year in jail. The jury also convicted appellant of two driving while revoked charges and sentenced him to one year in jail on each count. The trial judge ordered the sentences to run consecutively. From these actions the appellant appeals.
On June 1, 1989, Officer Curless of the Missouri State Patrol saw appellant's car parked outside a tavern in Quitman, Missouri. The vehicle had no license plate. Subsequently Curless and Deputy Sheriff Tray Pitts observed Brown drive his car away from where it had been parked. Curless knew the appellant and knew his operator's privilege had been revoked by the State. Brown was arrested for driving while revoked and while intoxicated.
Brown refused to take the proffered breathalyzer. Several months later Curless again observed Brown operating a motor vehicle in Hopkins, Nodaway County. Curless gave pursuit and stopped Brown. Brown exited from the driver's side of the vehicle. Curless proceeded to arrest Brown for driving while revoked.
Appellant alleges three points of error: (1) permitting an edited version of defendant's driving record to be passed to jury; (2) failure by the state to show defendant had the requisite culpable mental state knowing his license was revoked on June 1 and August 7, 1989; (3) trial court failure to find that the state failed to prove a refusal by appellant to submit to appropriate test to determine blood alcohol.
In Point I appellant contends that the trial court erred in passing an edited driving record of his among the jury and allowing the state to comment upon the number of entries in that record. Appellant has not properly preserved this issue for appeal as no objection was made to the passing of that record. In fact, defense counsel stated that he had no objection to that action.
Similarly, appellant made no objection to the remarks of the prosecuting attorney as to the number of entries contained in the driving record and the reference was clearly not plain error. Appellant's Point I is denied.
Appellant, in Point II, claims that the court erred in not holding that the state failed to show that he had the requisite culpable mental state. In order to convict appellant for driving while revoked, the state must establish a culpable...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Huff
...1992 for refusal to submit to a chemical test. This revocation is relevant to the issue of Defendant's knowledge. See, State v. Brown, 804 S.W.2d 396, 398 (Mo.App.1991). Point Judgment affirmed. CRANDALL, P.J., and REINHARD, J., concur. ...
-
Rothwell v. Dir. Revenue
...yield a satisfactory measure of the presence of competing substances. 11. We thus reject the Director's reliance on State v. Brown, 804 S.W.2d 396, 398 (Mo.App. W.D.1991) and McGuire v. Jackson Cnty. Prosecuting Attorney, 548 S.W.2d 272, 274–76 (Mo.App.1977). In both cases, a driver's initi......
-
State v. Moore
...v. Huffman, 627 S.W.2d 672 (Mo.App. W.D.1982), City of Kansas City v. Johnston, 778 S.W.2d 321 (Mo.App. W.D.1989), and State v. Brown, 804 S.W.2d 396 (Mo.App. W.D.1991). The trial court ruled that the defendant's entire driving record was admissible based on the State's cited cases. In its ......
-
State v. Collins
...W.D.1994) (finding proof of requisite mental state was made by certified copy of defendant's driving record); State v. Brown, 804 S.W.2d 396, 398 (Mo.App. W.D.1991) (holding the introduction of appellant's prior convictions and driving record were “pertinent on the issue of knowledge.”). Co......