State v. Buck
| Decision Date | 16 December 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. WD,WD |
| Citation | 724 S.W.2d 574 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Ralph E. BUCK, Appellant. 37850. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Kathleen Murphy Markie, Columbia, for appellant.
John M. Morris, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before CLARK, C.J., and DIXON and NUGENT, JJ.
Ralph Buck was charged with and convicted of first degree sexual assault and escape from confinement. His two points on appeal contend, as to both offenses, that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdicts and that acquittal should have been directed. The conviction of sexual assault is affirmed. The conviction of escape from confinement is reversed.
The events which gave rise to both charges lodged against appellant occurred in a continuous, interrelated sequence and are restated here without differentiation as to the separate crimes. The evidence is reviewed in the light most favorable to the state, all contrary evidence and inferences being disregarded. State v. Smith, 686 S.W.2d 43, 46 (Mo.App.1985).
The scene of the alleged crimes was the Boone County Jail where appellant was confined. On July 19, 1985, a female, F.C.D., was arrested for possession of marijuana and because of her bizarre behavior, she was placed in protective custody. She was combative, insisted on removing her clothes and rambled incoherently. Ultimately, F.C.D. was placed in a cell on the second floor of the jail where she continued to behave irrationally. At some time between July 19 and July 22, appellant and two other inmates of the jail were moved into a three-man cell which was adjacent to the cell occupied by F.C.D. Although the cells were separated by a masonry wall, appellant and his cellmates were able to observe F.C.D. through a hole in the wall and exchanged remarks with her about prospects for sexual encounters.
During the afternoon of July 22, the officers on duty at the jail heard banging noises coming from the second floor area, but because they were shorthanded, no one went to investigate until early evening. When the guard went to the cell area about 7:00 p.m., he found that a hole had been battered in the wall between appellant's cell and that of F.C.D. and appellant was in the latter's cell engaged in sexual intercourse with F.C.D. According to one of appellant's cell-mates who testified for the state, appellant had used a metal reinforcing bar removed from one of the cell bunks to knock out enough of the wall to gain access to F.C.D.'s cell.
Appellant was returned to his cell and F.C.D. was taken to the University of Missouri Medical Center for examination. In route, F.C.D. continued to make inappropriate statements, talked incoherently, refused to put on clothing and was belligerent. At the hospital, a psychiatrist was called in for consultation and after observing F.C.D., he expressed the opinion that she was mentally incapable of giving a valid consent to a physical examination. From current observations and information in the hospital records pertaining to F.C.D.'s prior admissions, the doctor's opinion was that F.C.D. was suffering from schizophrenia, paranoid type. A second examination was performed and that physician's diagnosis of F.C.D.'s mental illness was the same.
As to the sexual offense, appellant contends the state did not prove F.C.D.'s mental state was such that she was unable to consent to intercourse. He also contends there was no proof he had knowledge of the victim's mental impairment. The second argument is relevant only if the victim was in fact incapable of consenting and if the issue of knowledge on the part of the accused has been injected into the case.
The offense of sexual assault in the first degree is defined by § 566.040, RSMo.1978:
"A person commits the crime of sexual assault in the first degree if he has sexual intercourse with another person to whom he is not married and who is incapacitated or who is fourteen or fifteen years old."
Under § 556.061(13), RSMo.Cum.Supp.1984, incapacitated is defined as " * * * that physical or mental condition, temporary or permanent, in which a person is unconscious, unable to appraise the nature of his conduct, or unable to communicate unwillingness to an act."
The issue of whether or not F.C.D. was incapacitated at the time of appellant's assault upon her 1 turns upon whether F.C.D. was sufficiently deranged so that she was unable to appraise the nature of her conduct. The evidence from lay witnesses was that during her confinement in the Boone County Jail, F.C.D. spoke irrationally about being able to see through crystals and clusters of pearls, of people killing her babies and of fluorescent lights burning her body. She insisted on removing her clothes and poured water on herself because her body was burning. There was no evidence of any lucid intervals from the date she was taken into custody until she was admitted to a mental health facility. The objective signs of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Cone
..."unable to appraise the nature of his conduct" and "unable to communicate unwillingness to an act," were discussed in State v. Buck, 724 S.W.2d 574 (Mo. App. 1986). The court stated that the "issue of whether or not the victim was incapacitated ... turns upon whether [she] was sufficiently ......
-
Cone v. Denney
...court in Cone's case and found the evidence presented therein sufficient to support the defendant's conviction. See State v. Buck, 724 S.W.2d 574 (Mo. App. W.D. 1986). Buck offers no guidance related to the factual scenario presented in the case at bar.At the time Cone had sexual intercours......
-
Cone v. State Of Mo.
...court in Cone's case and found the evidence presented therein sufficient to support the defendant's conviction. See State v. Buck, 724 S.W.2d 574 (Mo.App. W.D.1986). Buck offers no guidance related to the factual scenario presented in the case at bar. At the time Cone had sexual intercourse......
-
State v. Moore
...he put a dummy in his bed, left his cell at an unauthorized time, and was found drinking alcohol in the prison library); State v. Buck, 724 S.W.2d 574 (Mo.Ct.App.1986) (inmate committed sexual assault but not escape when he broke through the wall between his cell and another inmate's, rapin......