State v. Davis, 37885.
| Decision Date | 13 March 1942 |
| Docket Number | No. 37885.,37885. |
| Citation | 161 S.W.2d 973 |
| Parties | STATE v. DAVIS. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Jackson County, Criminal Division No. 3. T. J. Seehorn, Judge.
Sterling Davis was convicted of robbery by means of a deadly weapon, and he appeals.
Judgment affirmed.
Roy McKittrick, Atty. Gen., and Tyre W. Burton, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.
WESTHUES, Commissioner.
Appellant, Sterling Davis, was convicted in the Jackson county circuit court on a charge of robbery by means of a deadly weapon, and sentenced to imprisonment in the penitentiary for a term of ten years. He appealed.
Theodore T. Hall testified as a witness for the state. From his evidence we deduce the following: On March 9, 1940, the witness was in charge of a filling station located at 819 Paseo, Kansas City, Missouri. He was employed by one Ray T. Darby. At about 9 p.m. of that day a colored man carrying a small bucket or can came to the station and asked for a gallon of gasoline. Hall reached for a funnel to be used in filling the can, whereupon the colored man said, "This is a holdup." Hall turned and the colored man drew a revolver and ordered him to open the cash register. The colored man took cash amounting to over $33, then left. Hall positively identified appellant as the man who robbed him of the cash.
Appellant filed no brief in this court. In his motion for new trial he alleged that the evidence was insufficient to sustain a verdict of guilty, particularly as to the identification of appellant. Hall stated that the lights of the filling station were burning and he had a good opportunity to observe the man who perpetrated the holdup. We deem the evidence ample to sustain the verdict.
Appellant also alleged that the trial court erred in admitting incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial evidence offered by the state and in rejecting competent evidence offered by appellant. In his motion appellant did not point out what evidence had been erroneously rejected or what evidence had been erroneously admitted. Such an assignment does not preserve any question for review. Appellant filed a supplemental motion wherein he asked for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence. The complaint in this motion, however, is that appellant was not given time to prepare his case, and had appellant had the time and opportunity to prepare his case the evidence would have been obtained for his trial. Appellant was arrested on March 12, 1940. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Preston
...708, 38 S.W.2d 32; State v. Powers, 130 Mo. 475, 32 S.W. 984. He had an excellent opportunity to carefully observe the man. State v. Davis, Mo.Sup., 161 S.W.2d 973. He said he was not frightened and the circumstances were such that his senses were alert to the man's size, general appearance......
-
State v. Preston
...708, 38 S.W. 2d 32; State. v. Powers, 130 Mo. 475, 32 S.W. 984. He had an excellent opportunity to carefully observe the man. State v. Davis, (Mo.) 161 S.W. 2d 973. He said was not frightened and the circumstances were such that his senses were alert to the man's size, general appearance an......
-
State v. Sarten
...and must be ruled substantial. State v. Dupepe, Mo.Sup., 241 S.W.2d 4; State v. Preston, Mo.Sup., 184 S.W.2d 1015; State v. Davis, Mo.Sup., 161 S.W.2d 973; State v. Kaner, 338 Mo. 972, 93 S.W.2d Appellant's second point, that the prosecuting attorneys prejudiced the rights of defendant by i......
-
State v. Smith, 45588
...value, and was, in our opinion, sufficient in supporting the submission and the verdict and judgment of conviction. State v. Davis, Mo.Sup., 161 S.W.2d 973; State v. Preston, Mo.Sup., 184 S.W.2d 1015; State v. Dupepe, Mo.Sup., 241 S.W.2d 4; State v. Brown, Mo.Sup., 298 S.W.2d In assignment ......