State v. Bruce, 47735
| Citation | 671 S.W.2d 821 |
| Decision Date | 09 May 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 47735,47735 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Anthony BRUCE, Appellant. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Debra B. Arnold, St. Louis, for appellant.
John Ashcroft, Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Defendant appeals after his conviction by a jury of robbery in the second degree, acting with others, in violation of § 569.030, RSMo. 1978. The court found defendant to be a prior offender and sentenced him to eight years' imprisonment. We affirm.
At approximately 11:00 p.m. on January 24, 1983, the victim, her two and one-half year old daughter and her boyfriend left Cardinal Glennon Hospital, where they had gone seeking treatment for the child. As they walked along, they noticed four young black men walking parallel to them on the opposite side of the street. The victim, child and boyfriend stopped briefly at a service station for change and proceeded to a nearby bus stop. As they waited, three of the men that they had seen earlier, including defendant, crossed the street and approached. Defendant ordered the victim to give him her purse and attempted to take it from her. After the victim refused, her boyfriend began to fight with defendant and another man. The victim then tried to run back to the service station, however, the third man grabbed her purse and stated "Give me your purse bitch, or you're dead"; she relented.
The assailants then fled, with the boyfriend in pursuit. Police were summoned and apprehended defendant and another man a short distance from the crime scene. As the other suspect was apprehended, he threw a pocket calculator to the ground. The victim later identified it as coming from her purse. The defendant and the other man were identified by the victim and her boyfriend, both at the scene and in court.
Defendant's sole point on appeal is that the state's verdict director, which blended the pattern instructions MAI-CR2d 2.12 (on defendant's responsibility for conduct of another person) and MAI-CR2d 23.04 (on second degree robbery), was erroneous in that it "[incorporates] the nebulous concept of 'Acting together,' which deviated substantially from the expressed standard of conduct required under Missouri law ... in that it failed to advise the jury as to what specific acts on the part of defendant, if any, ......
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Carson
...State v. Turner, 705 S.W.2d 108, 110 (Mo.App.1986); State v. Hawkins, 703 S.W.2d 67, 70-71 (Mo.App.1985); State v. Bruce, 671 S.W.2d 821, 822 (Mo.App.1984); State v. Davis, 675 S.W.2d 652, 657-58 (Mo.App.1984); State v. Mick, 674 S.W.2d 554, 558 (Mo.App.1984); State v. Toney, 680 S.W.2d 268......
-
State v. Pendergrass, 14662
...(Mo.App.1985); State v. Toney, 680 S.W.2d 268, 278 (Mo.App.1984); State v. Davis, 675 S.W.2d 652, 658 (Mo.App.1984); State v. Bruce, 671 S.W.2d 821, 822 (Mo.App.1984); State v. Stevenson, 660 S.W.2d 236, 237 (Mo.App.1983); State v. Burton, 721 S.W.2d 58, 63-64 (Mo.App.1986). But see State v......
-
State v. Mitchell, 14046
... ... In support of segment "(b)" of its argument, the State cites State v. Bruce, 671 S.W.2d 821, 822 ... Page 285 ... (Mo.App.1984); State v. Stevenson, 660 S.W.2d 236, 237 (Mo.App.1983); and State v. Grady, 577 S.W.2d ... ...
-
State v. Barnes, 48897
...inception in 1975. Since the submitted Instruction was authorized, we cannot declare that Instruction erroneous. E.g., State v. Bruce, 671 S.W.2d 821, 822 (Mo.App.1984). A fortiori, its use was not plain error. E.g., State v. Stevenson, 660 S.W.2d 236, 237 We choose, however, to address mor......