State v. Chavez, 56971
| Decision Date | 17 July 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 56971,No. 2,56971,2 |
| Citation | 483 S.W.2d 68 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Stephen CHAVEZ, Appellant |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
John C. Danforth, Atty. Gen., Richard S. Paden, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
John J. Cosgrove, Kansas City Legal Aid and Defender Society of Greater Kansas City, for appellant; Paul T. Miller, Kansas City, Executive Director, Willard B. Bunch, Kansas City, Chief Defender, of counsel.
HOUSER, Commissioner.
Stephen Chavez, convicted of robbery in the first degree and sentenced to 6 years' imprisonment, appeals on the sole ground that the court erred in overruling his motion to suppress his in-court identification, based upon the contention that it was tainted by a lineup confrontation without the presence of his counsel in violation of the Sixth Amendment to the federal constitution.
The lineup having been conducted prior to the filing of the information the requirements of United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218, 87 S.Ct. 1926, 18 L.Ed.2d 1149, and Gilbert v. California, 388 U.S. 263, 87 S.Ct. 1951, 18 L.Ed.2d 1178, have no application. This has been the consistent ruling of this Court. State v. Walters, Mo.Sup., 457 S.W.2d 817; Gaitan v. State, Mo.Sup., 464 S.W.2d 33, 35; State v. Richards, Mo.Sup., 467 S.W.2d 33, 37; State v. Stevens, Mo.Sup., 467 S.W.2d 906, 907; State v. Gates, Mo.Sup., 471 S.W.2d 272; State v. Brookins, Mo.Sup., 468 S.W.2d 42, 47. Any lingering question as to the propriety of our rulings in this respect is removed by the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States on June 7, 1972 in Kirby v. Illinois, No. 70--5061, 406 U.S. 682, 92 S.Ct. 1877, 32 L.Ed.2d 411, holding that the per se exclusionary rule of Wade and Gilbert does not apply to preindictment confrontations.
Appellant's contention that the lineup was unnecessarily suggestive because of substantial differences in physical appearance between appellant and the other men in the lineup stands for disapproval for the reason that there is ample evidence that the in-court identification was of independent origin. This robbery occurred in the Brown Jug Tavern. Norma Nay, daughter of the owners and manager of the tavern, testified that three men entered the tavern, including this appellant whom she described as dark-skinned, with black hair, wearing a black three-quarter-length leather coat and black pants, either a Mexican or Italian. They opened the door, said this was a stickup, told Norma and the barmaid to stay on the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Morris v. State
...Kirby v. Illinois, 406 U.S. 682, 92 S.Ct. 1877, 32 L.Ed.2d 411 (United States Supreme Court, June 7, 1972); State v. Chavez, Mo.Sup., 483 S.W.2d 68 (July 10, 1972). In Arnold v. State, 484 S.W.2d 68 (Mo. 1972), the court said, l.c. The trial court's findings here indicate that the lineup in......
-
Agee v. State
...were removed and in analogous situations the authorities are contrary to appellant's position. State v. Moore, supra; State v. Chavez, 483 S.W.2d 68 (Mo.1972). If appellant's claim with respect to the taking by the officers of the article of clothing be construed as search and seizure probl......
-
State v. Jordan
...equivalent of the initiation of 'adversary judicial proceedings'. State v. Walters, 457 S.W.2d 817, 818(1) (Mo.1970); State v. Chavez, 483 S.W.2d 68, 69(1) (Mo.1972); State v. West, 484 S.W.2d 191, 192(1) (Mo.1972); Brown v. State, 495 S.W.2d 690, 694(9) (Mo.App.1973). 2 Because the confron......
-
Robinson v. State, 56987
...v. Illinois (decided June 7, 1972), 406 U.S. 682, 92 S.Ct. 1877, 32 L.Ed.2d 411; State v. Chavez, Mo.Sup. (Mo. 56,971, decided July 17, 1972) 483 S.W.2d 68. V. Accused was not subjected to double jeopardy, or double punishment for the same offense, on the ground that he was charged with att......