State v. Connors

• Decision Date: 13 November 1912
• Citation: 245 Mo. 477,150 S.W. 1058
• Parties: STATE v. CONNORS.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

150 S.W. 1058

245 Mo. 477

STATE v. CONNORS.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

November 13, 1912.

1. CRIMINAL LAW (§ 829)—INSTRUCTIONS—REQUESTED INSTRUCTIONS COVERED BY CHARGE GIVEN.

It is not error to refuse an instruction covered by correct instructions given.

2. CRIMINAL Law (§ 1064)—APPEAL—QUESTIONS REVIEWABLE—MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL.

The failure of accused, in his motion for new trial, to call the attention of the court to its failure to charge on a defense supported by evidence prevents a new trial on such ground.

3. LARCENY (§ 55)—EVIDENCE—SUFFICIENCY.

Evidence held to identify accused as one of the parties committing a larceny, so as to justify his conviction.

Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; Wilson A. Taylor, Judge.

Michael, alias Split, Connors was convicted of larceny, and he appeals. Affirmed.

Gillespie & Douglas, of St. Louis, for appellant. Elliott W. Major, Atty. Gen., and John M. Atkinson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

KENNISH, J.

The prosecution in this case was instituted in the circuit court of the city of St. Louis by the filing of an information charging appellant Connors, Tom Meyers, and George Meyers jointly with burglary in the second degree and grand larceny. A. severance having been granted, appellant was tried at the June term of said court, convicted of grand larceny, and his punishment assessed at imprisonment in the penitentiary for two years. He was sentenced in accordance with the verdict, and from such judgment of sentence he appealed to this court.

The charge in the information was the breaking and entering of a car belonging to the St. Louis Merchants' Bridge Terminal Railway Company and stealing therefrom four cases of shoes and one roll of carpet, all of the value of $120.

The state's evidence tended to show the following facts: On January 9, 1911, the shoes and carpet in question were placed in a car, along with other goods, to be transported to Colorado. The car was then on the tracks of the St. Louis Merchants' Bridge Terminal Railway Company, in the city of St. Louis. This company hauls the cars of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company from the freighthouses where they are loaded to the main tracks of the latter company. The car load of goods above mentioned was being shipped over the Rock Island Road. Immediately after the goods were loadedy and at about 5:30 o'clock p. m., the door of the car was closed and sealed. About 7:30 p. m., after the car had been moved some distance, but while it was in the city of St. Louis and under the control of the St. Louis Merchants' Bridge Terminal Railway Company, one of the yard clerks of that company inspected the car and found that the seal had been taken from the door. About 6:15 p. m. an employé of the John Deere Plow Company found a roll of carpet lying on the ground beside a box car that was standing near where the Rock Island car had been loaded. He carried the carpet into the offices of the plow company, and one of the clerks of the company notified the police department of the finding of the carpet. Two officers went to the offices of the plow company. They had the carpet placed by the side of the car where it had been found, and waited to see if any person would appear to take possession of it. One of the officers went inside the car, and the other stationed himself near by in a doorway of the building occupied by the plow company. The officer who was concealed in the car discovered that there were four boxes in the car. They were afterwards found to be the four boxes of shoes in question. About 7 p. m. another police officer, who was walking a beat in the vicinity of where the two officers had concealed themselves, saw the defendant and George Meyers driving along the street in a wagon. A few minutes later two men approached the car in which the officer was stationed and looked at the carpet. One of them remarked that everything looked all right, and they walked away. Ten minutes later they returned, climbed into the car, and dragged two of the boxes of shoes toward the door. .The defendant discovered the presence of the officer and said to Tom Meyers, the other man who had entered the car with him: "Beat it. We are caught." As the two were going out of the car, the officer called on them to halt and...